Movie News

Part 2 of Quint's interview with Jon Favreau! IRON MAN 2, Stark's alcoholism, Empire Strikes Back and THE AVENGERS!

Published at: Oct. 29, 2008, 12:41 a.m. CST by quint

CLICK HERE FOR PART ONE OF QUINT’S INTERVIEW WITH JON FAVREAU, COVERING GENNDY TARTAKOVSKY’S INVOLVEMENT IN IRON MAN 2, TIDBITS ON AVATAR AND FAVREAU’S OPINION ON NEXT GENERATION MEDIA!

Quint: Do you think there’s a danger of jumping too digital too early? Because I think one of the things that a lot of at least movie fans kind of grabbed onto was the fact that you blended Stan Winston’s suit with CGI, that the suit had weight to it...

Jon Favreau: It’s amazing how much of the stuff was replaced. And I think that the attention to detail can never be… you can never bypass that stage. Part of why I want to do it this way is because if we could dial into the action early enough it will give us a lot more time to refine things and a lot more time to integrate it well. But having seen Iron Man flying in the dogfight sequence in daylight, the way ILM delivered it, it really made me… if you get the animation right, and you’re dealing with non-organic characters, it really has hit a level where if you don’t ask too much of the camera and too much of the actual choreography and you keep that within the realm of reality it’s actually very, very difficult to tell. I found myself giving notes on shots that weren’t digital to the vendors. I know we talked about that last time. What I don’t want to do is tie myself to too much practical stuff that it makes the action not dynamic enough and the difficulty with IRON MAN isn’t he’s not ROBOCOP he doesn’t just walk on the ground. He’s also in the air and you have to find the right animators and tune that in right so that you believe it. But we are going to seek to incorporate elements that are practical in there as well and I think that sleight of hand was what helped sell the reality of IRON MAN.

Quint: Yeah well that’s the trick. If you’re not sure what the effect is, practical or not, if you can’t really tell... You wouldn’t have had people go “Oh, that looks great, that’s a great practical” and be fooled if they hadn’t seen so much actual practical beforehand.

Jon Favreau: Yeah, so that’s the game. That’s the magic trick. And I think people think there’s a lot more practical in it than there is. And a lot of times…we shot a lot of it practically, we ended up replacing much of it. Because the digital suit actually looked better at times than the real one, and moved more naturally, but you don’t ever want to get to the point where you’re so confident in the digital realm that he begins to move and act in ways he couldn’t in a practical realm, you do want to keep them guessing. And there are certain moments where you’re just going to cut loose and you just know there’s no other way to do it. You don’t want to be too much of a luddite. I think I was a little too conservative, at times, with the action. I played it too safe. Now I’m confident in my vendors, I’m confident in my level of understanding of CGI and a level of technology. There are things where it’s extremely convincing and there are areas where I want to try and incorporate practical aspects that normally aren’t. But the stuff in DARK KNIGHT, many of those buildings when he was hang gliding weren’t real. I’m hard pressed to tell. There’s certain things like set extension, that will help us open the movie up and allow us to shoot in various places but I have to complete all the work and be much more ambitious as far as our locations go and open this up. And I think that there’s a real James Bond quality to Tony Stark that James Bond seems to have left behind and nobody’s doing it. There’s definitely a sense of humor…that the Roger Moore James Bonds or the Sean Connery James Bonds had when I was growing up. There was a tonal swagger to it and there was a sense of really having a window into the way the other half lives, in an over-the-top way. And I think as James Bond, as that series has reinvigorated itself by moving closer to the… almost to the BOURNE IDENTITY approach, it’s leaving behind this really fun world that seems anachronistic for Bond now. But for Tony Stark I say we have to go for it…

Quint: Oh, it’s perfect, and you know if you didn’t have somebody like Downey in the role then I would be a little hesitant. But I mean Downey has that ability, he has that likeability, that comic timing, that sense of humor. He’s just so likeable. Just like the Connery Bond. It’s like people just like liking the guy.

Jon Favreau: But you also got the sense that the Connery Bond could get his head blown off if he did the wrong thing. So there’s either GOLDFINGER or there’s… CASINO ROYALE. There’s like this middle ground in between where you can have some fun with it and play up a comic book version of Tony Stark. And Downey… you could get away with a lot with Downey because he doesn’t seem like somebody out of the pages of MAXIM magazine, he seems like a guy out of the… tech conference. He’s a different (type) who happens to like to live large but he has a sense of humor about it. And at his heart he’s got certain shortcomings and certain things he’s wrestling with, certain addictions that Tony Stark has and the fun thing is going to be what happens after he says “I am Iron Man,” how has the world changed.

Quint: Well that’s fascinating. That decision right there immediately takes it and gives the movie its own identity and completely takes it out of all the other superhero movies which are still having to deal…the Supermans, the Batmans, Spidermans… They still have to cover their identity, I mean I guess you can look at X-MEN a little bit…

Jon Favreau: A little bit. FANTASTIC FOUR did it in a different way. That was… that made us… we definitely want to do our own version of it. But a lot of our time is spent steering clear of DARK KNIGHT and that franchise. Tonally, casting wise, the way we present the action. Because there’s so many similarities at the core, and now that we were both very successful movies this summer it’s going to be… there’s always going to be the Coke and Pepsi argument going back and forth. For me I’m very, very happy to be Pepsi. I think Nolan and I seem to have different personalities as filmmakers. He takes filmmaking very seriously and I treat it more like I’m throwing a party. To me the experience I’m building to when I’m making a movie is what’s it going to be like when we show footage at COMIC-CON, what it’s going to be like when I go to the party, when I go to the Cineramadome and pop in and listen to the crowd. That’s, to me, what it’s all about. And so it’s really like throwing a party in that respect, that you want people to have fun. If they didn’t have fun, if they don’t like it… then I’m disappointed. Because it’s all about that, to me it’s a medium; to me it’s not a work of art. It’s a medium, it’s a means to communicate a feeling, an emotion, an experience to an audience. They’re giving you ten bucks and an hour and a half, and you have to get in there and make them feel like it was a good deal.

Quint: Well, you can have the best of both worlds there. I think that if IRON MAN was just an effects spectacular… then it would be a different thing, but I mean I think why the critics liked it so much and why it was so highly rated on IMDB is because it kind of…it doesn’t come off as a hollow experience.

Jon Favreau: I don’t think that people want a hollow experience. See when I say you’ve got to… You could write a rock’n’roll song, a pop song, that doesn’t mean that the song has to… The BEATLES were writing pop songs. But that doesn’t mean that they can’t have, they can’t be invested with something that’s important and meaningful and emotional. So, I think that without the emotional aspect and stating some truth and bringing people together on… having some sort of spiritual wrinkle to it that connects with what we all share in common and around the world, I think if you don’t do that you are selling your audience short. So, when I say that I want to throw a party, I’m not saying I just want to make a popcorn movie that takes your mind off of things then you move on and you forget about it. I want the movie that you enjoy and cheer for and laugh at when you’re there, but you have an emotional experience. Movies deal in emotion, that’s the currency. And if you don’t feel emotionally, some sort of an emotional experience by watching something… and titillation is not an emotional experience. It’s frosting. That’s something you do to up the ante so that you feel the emotion on a deeper level. And so as I get more experienced with making movies, you’re able to use all of the tools that you have whether it’s CGI, special effects, explosions, comedy, humor, and you use all of those things to hopefully make people feel some of the same emotions that they would in smaller movies, independent films. When all I had was dialogue and humor to use in storytelling… how do you preserve that standard and still make something that would be a great Superbowl commercial.

Quint: Well if you hit that median… I don’t know what tone you’re going for with the next one but I would imagine…I think the kind of the golden standard especially for this kind of movie is EMPIRE STRIKES BACK, where you have something that really kind of ups things, a darker movie, but it’s still fun.

Click here to read along with the next bit in amazing Sound-O-Text!

Jon Favreau: That’s what we talk about. We talk about EMPIRE and we talk about WRATH OF KHAN. And the reason that those two are such great templates in many ways is because there’s very plot in either of them, and it gives you room to explore characters and it allows you to up the ante on character development. What’s so great about EMPIRE is you don’t feel like Luke Skywalker became a Jedi in STAR WARS and now it’s the adventures of Luke the Jedi. You feel like he is still in transition, he’s still seeking out mentors, he’s learning lessons, he’s delving deeper and deeper into his own emotional core and that is exemplified by the trials of Yoda, learning to master the force, going into the cave, facing his shadow. And it’s very, very Joseph Campbell shadow archetype where you’re dealing with mentors, shape shifters, you have allies and friends, heralds… It really hits all of the primal archetypical milestones of a Joseph Campbell mythic journey.

Quint: So, is Tony Stark’s shadow alcohol?

Jon Favreau: We’re definitely going to use alcohol, but alcohol isn’t a shadow, I don’t think. I think addiction is something you use to anesthetize yourself when you’re dealing with something deeper. And if you look at twelve step programs, that are probably the most effective way of dealing with an addiction, you’ll see that they spend very little time dealing with the actual thing you’re addicted to: substance. Most of the steps become about dealing with your spiritual health and delving deeper into what’s underneath the addiction. And I think in that respect it’s very telling as to what… it’s a matter of discovering what Tony Stark’s issues are that he’s dealing with that’s causing him to drink, causing him to womanize, causing him to escape and run in whatever way he does. And that’s what’s compelling especially when you have a guy like Robert, who can really handle this kind of a storyline. Of course you don’t want to overwhelm the film. I want to maintain the tone we had with the first one, for the most part. Nolan has cornered the market on that tone and does it well. It’s not what I do well or what I want to see in IRON MAN. And so you have to have enough of it to inform the story and I think that EMPIRE STRIKES BACK really walked that line very well. I wouldn’t call it a dark movie but it definitely was for real, it definitely had some emotional resonance to it. It wasn’t just a videogame. So, we try to study who did it right. And I feel pretty at ease because typically the number two movies are… you sort of the best of both worlds, where you know what you’re doing, you’ve got your team together, and you’ve got your cast, and you have your basic things, and it’s how do you expand out from that? And the audience is ready and accepting, you don’t have to prove yourself to them, they’re coming expecting a good time. And you could really do stuff that you can’t do in the first one, now that the origin story is out of the way. And with the villains and the playfulness and the dialogue we have between us and the fans of the books where you start to pick through forty years of books and try to find villains and storylines that apply to both the Cold War context in which IRON MAN was presented, as well as what could work with the headlines today. What pays homage to the tradition of this storyline and what does not seem ridiculous when it hits film. So it’s preserving the soul of the experience while having enough reference, so that there are moments where the fans are rewarded for having followed his stories are so long and not frustrated by that. Often times people who are fans of comic books go see the movie and enjoy it less than people who don’t know anything about the heroes because they’re so frustrated by how many leaps and liberties they took with the source material. In IRON MAN I think the fans actually enjoyed the movie more than the people who didn’t know what was going on and I think that should be it, you should have stuff in the margins for people who have dedicated themselves to following this and were excited when they heard it got made and they’re the first ones in line to see it. You don’t want them to be disappointed, you want them to have an even richer experience. And then have their friends turn to them and say “I don’t understand who’s that guy with the eye patch” you know what I mean? That’s when it becomes fun. When I saw LORD OF THE RINGS I felt good that I had read the book LORD OF THE RINGS. It enriched the experience for me.

Quint: Yeah, you guys did that when you had Nick Fury come in and the shot where you can see Cap’s shield on the workbench…

Jon Favreau: Yeah, and we named like the pilots’ call sign was Whiplash One and Two. There are little things here and there… and the Ten Rings.

Quint: Yeah, that one I didn’t get until the second viewing.

Jon Favreau: And if you look at the flag of the Ten Rings, you’ll see that the writing… it looks like it’s Arabic but it’s actually Mongolian writing on the flags. So, we were really paying attention, of course now it becomes more and more difficult because we’re weaving… it has to culminate in the AVENGERS. Which, although I won’t be directing it, I’ll be involved with it as an executive producer and I would feel really disappointed if what good will we’ve curried from IRON MAN 1 and hopefully 2, is not lived up to in the AVENGERS.

Quint: Yeah because that movie’s got to… you talk about what has to knock it out of the park. THE AVENGERS is one of those movies that’s been kind of a fanboy dream for years. And then you’re coming off the success of IRON MAN and even the HULK and I love the interconnectivity that’s going on now and it just seems to all be building to an AVENGERS movie.

Jon Favreau: And I’m going to get a little more involved now with what goes on with the other movies. I’m very excited about Kenneth Branagh, I can’t wait to see his take on THOR and we’re really looking at the Cap stuff, very closely. For one because we put the shield in there and Tony’s legacy… Howard Stark’s legacy somehow is related to… there’s some relationship between Tony’s father and what was going on in World War II, in the Marvel Universe, and Shield, so we’re trying to lay some pipe here so that when it all happens it feels somewhat inevitable. But there are a lot of tonal challenges that are going to take place, more so in the other films I think. THOR has a tremendously… that’s going to be the most difficult one to integrate into this reality. And if it can be properly done then you get a great version of AVENGERS. If not, AVENGERS is going to seem like ROGER RABBIT with different cartoon characters from different worlds, you have Betty Boop next to Daffy Duck next to Donald Duck you know. (laughs) And I don’t know that’s the experience it should feel like, it should feel like a unified Marvel Universe. And I know that the Marvel guys are very, very vigilant about that.

Quint: Well, and it’s smart especially they’re involving the creative teams behind these movies and the kind of interconnecting themselves and able to work with each other so that way like you were saying it doesn’t feel like you’re just… where we don’t just see a scene in IRON MAN 2 where we’re going “oh gee, I wonder if that’s supposed to mean…that’s going to pay off later” something that’s more organic.

Jon Favreau: It’s amazing how much you have to figure it out so that it makes sense it takes a lot of effort to weave all this stuff together. Just making a movie is difficult, let alone trying to service a whole set of films that has to coexist. I think a really good step in that direction is them getting this facility down at Manhattan Beach so that all the films will be working out of the same studio and shooting on the same stages and they’ll be prepping and posting and we’ll all be in that one area so we can bounce back and forth and hopefully they’ll be a generosity of creative input between all of the filmmakers and writers and producers so that we could come up with something that’s much more synergistic than anything that has been seen before. But it’s a tall order.

Quint: It’s a very exciting time for movie fans and for comic fans. And I guess in closing are you going to keep up that transparency that you had with the first one with the fans and the open dialogue with them?

Jon Favreau: The trick is going to be… I think I’m going to setup a Facebook page for it. So, I will still disseminate information and include them in the process as much as I can. The difficulty becomes… you don’t want to undermine the release of the film.

Quint: Well, you walked that tightrope really well with IRON MAN though.

Jon Favreau: Yeah, but the hunger, the curiosity factor is much higher now. Since the movie’s come out, just the way my… the things that I would sort of say informally on a little blog with some of the core fans would get picked up in mainstream press and on Hollywood type blogs. You have to be a little more selective in the way you… it can’t be quite so conversational because the way you turn a phrase it ends up leading people to conclusions they shouldn’t be led to or they might be misleading. I never want to lie to my fans. But I reserve the right to keep certain things out of sight until it’s time to reveal them. I think everybody has snuck into their mom’s closet and seen their Christmas presents before they opened them and then taped them back shut and it’s just not as fun Christmas morning. And I want to make sure that everybody has a good time. So I want to get enough out there that it keeps people excited and it rewards them for paying attention but I don’t want to blow the experience of the movie. And I think we barely squeaked by, I don’t know if there were any secrets that were not revealed by the time people saw the movie. And the one big thing was that your site… we really went out of our way to shoot Sam Jackson’s scene. We came in on the weekend, we had a skeleton crew, we snuck him in a limo. There was no paperwork. We did it, whisked him out of there. And like a week later you guys put it up. And the only fun thing that came out of it was all the preview prints and even the premiere print didn’t include the scene.

Quint: Yeah, I know! We were getting emails, people going “You fucking liars, you lied to us!”

Jon Favreau: (laughs) All is fair in love and war. But I think it made it even more fun when people actually saw the movie. That we even cared enough and that Marvel was even willing to do that. Says that relationship is an important relationship, between the fans and the filmmakers, and I want to… It’s not like I’m going to cloister myself away and not communicate. I’m still going to be the guy… If I go to COMIC CON I better bring something good, you know what I mean? If I say something, it better be something important. And I’ll try and maintain that dialogue. I’m also dealing with a studio that tends to be very secretive about things. So I think that I’m going to probably be more open than most filmmakers would be, but I definitely don’t want to blow enough stuff… because stuff’s going to come out, between all the sites that there are. Stuff will be figured out on its own. And if we reveal too much stuff and certain things are figured out or spies get pictures of things we won’t have any razzle dazzle left for the actual release of the film, and that’s the only concern. Other than that I love sharing the stuff, I love talking to the fans, and I will continue to but I just don’t think… while I was doing IRON MAN I was like answering every question about every thing. And now it’s not going to take much for people to figure out what’s going on, but we’ll try to maintain a veil of secrecy and I enjoy everybody who tries to pull that veil away. That’s the game.

Quint: By playing hard to get man, you’re just going to get everybody more excited and there will be a lot more discussions. And that secrecy is something that people like JJ Abrams have been able to really use to their advantage. And even if…

Jon Favreau: That being said I can’t keep my mouth shut. I always like to get everything buzzing around you know what I mean? Because there’s always buzz from other movies and it’s like “ah let’s get something out there”. I love sending pictures out. To be honest from you I like the feedback, because the feedback does affect things. There was a shot in the Super Bowl ad that didn’t get there in time for that and the feedback on that gave me the ability to turn around and say “Look see, it’s not just me. They have a very high standard, these people. They don’t just eat what we feed them, we have to satisfy, you have to treat it like a chef, not like a short order cook. They’re not just going to eat what you put in front of them. If they don’t feel respected they will not support this thing. This has to be special. There’s too many movies like this out there. We have to win their approval.” So I like the dialogue, I learn from the dialogue, I’m tremendously grateful to the fans for turning this thing into a phenomenon. All the mainstream press was saying shitty things under their breath in their articles writing about “Marvel parades out its’ B-list heroes does anybody give a shit?” And because the fans gave a shit and liked what we were doing and I was lucky enough to be making this movie in a time when there was still an appetite and there was a very vocal, viral online community where word would spread one way or the other when you’re doing something good and they like it word gets out there. And the next thing you know there are eight thousand prints on screens and shows selling out till three in the morning and them adding screenings and stuff because of people texting each other, and that all started from Comic-Con, that all started from people liking the first trailer. And whoever bootlegged that Youtube thing… I know that Paramount chased it down and pulled it down and that’s what they have to do, but as a filmmaker that was probably one of the biggest thrills of the movie, watching that bootlegged video with the crowd reactions in it, and you couldn’t even see the screen barely. It captured that sense of something special was happening, and people were into it. It was just a great, great feeling.

Quint: And in a way that kind of really helped the enthusiasm spread more than seeing a pristine Apple Quicktime of it. There’s something to seeing footage like that when you have people going crazy and blowing out the little speaker on whatever recording device they were using.

Jon Favreau: Yeah, exactly, on their cell phone. It gave Paramount a lot of enthusiasm, and then they really went out of their way to make sure…they helped me cut together that segment. Josh Greenstein over there worked very hard on that thing. He took it seriously. And I was always pushing for more, more, more footage. I really wanted to… I said we got to really make a splash because we’re the underdog here. Nobody’s expecting this thing to be… this is not the biggest story there. My god we had INDIANA JONES, CLOVERFIELD, there was a lot of big buzz around with other films around ours. And it was that experience that sort of made this movie more of a priority for them and then they really supported it well and marketed it well and put a lot of work into those trailers and commercials and I even liked the new DVD commercials are really fun too. They’re really fine just like how they’re handling this whole thing. Paramount’s been a class act, and now that Marvel has like a… Marvel’s a much bigger deal at Paramount than it was when we started then. They have more partnerships at the time and now, now we’re very important to each other and that feels good. So I’m really enjoying the experience of IRON MAN 2 so far. And I was very nervous going in with the amount of time we had, but it’s amazing how much progress we’re able to make very quickly because we’ve learned from the mistakes of last time. We’re much more efficient. The basic designs of the suit are there so if anything changes we’re building off of something else. We have our basic cast. And we understand what the basic story is, so it’s a much easier process than the first time around and I hope that is reflected by a movie that’s even more enjoyable experience.

Quint: Cool man. Alright well yeah I think that’s all I can think of. So…

Jon Favreau: Well great to talk to you. Come by and visit us!

Notice how he dropped the Cold War era premiere of the character? Is that a hint, you think? Or am I over-analyzing everything like he talked about at the close of the interview? And how awesome is it that he has his team working with Genndy Tartakovsky plotting out the action sequences for IRON MAN 2!?! I know I'm psyched. I hope you enjoyed the chat. Many thanks to Jon Favreau for taking an hour of his life to bullshit with me about the upcoming film and his thoughts on the industry at this moment. I think if he’s able to collaborate as closely as he wants on the other Marvel properties we could be in for a very creative and special time in big event filmmaking. What are your thoughts? -Quint quint@aintitcool.com



Readers Talkback

comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Oct. 29, 2008, 12:45 a.m. CST

    FIRST!!!

    by animadictio

    I knew this day would come ...

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 12:47 a.m. CST

    Producing Avengers?

    by Carl XVI Gustaf

    Alexander Skarsgard as Thor please! Thanks!

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 12:53 a.m. CST

    Third

    by SingingHatchet

    Third

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 12:53 a.m. CST

    I guess I should read the story now.

    by SingingHatchet

    Oh, and D@MN you Michael Bay

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 1:09 a.m. CST

    Part2, now with gravy

    by Melvin_Pelvis

    there is a very slim chance, that someone's thinking of making a novie

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 1:15 a.m. CST

    IMINO!

    by SingingHatchet

    Just kidding. INO gots to eat.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 1:16 a.m. CST

    Why could Jon

    by SingingHatchet

    have directed Transformers? D@MN you Michael Bay!

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 1:20 a.m. CST

    Demon in a bottle story

    by Melvin_Pelvis

    yeah, this can be done in 83 minutes

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 1:23 a.m. CST

    Boy it sounds like this guy is a true pragmatist. thank Christ.

    by IndustryKiller!

    Iron man. loved it. Fucking loved it. but it had some third act issues and I dont think Favreau even needs to hear it, he gets it.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 1:23 a.m. CST

    Favreau is a class act all the way. Great intereview.

    by Spacker Dave

    'Nuff said.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 1:25 a.m. CST

    Intereview?!? where the fuck did that come from?

    by Spacker Dave

    It's interview, arsehat!

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 1:29 a.m. CST

    Favreau is awesome!

    by Pappachubby

    I mean, that guy get's it! He nailed Iron Man. It had all the 'pop' that we love but still had depth of characters in tony Stark and Obadiah. He seems to have struck the right balance of serious and fun. Well done sir! Glad you are out there at the helm of this stuff! Keep up the great work. Very much looking forward to Ironman 2!!!!

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 1:36 a.m. CST

    I agree. That Comic Con presentation last year was crucial reall

    by ludmir88

    And I followed that project since Comic Con 2006 when they showed us the teaser poster. I was intrigued how the armor would work and of course how Downey would work.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 1:38 a.m. CST

    Please, please. Marvel Zombies coming 2017!!!

    by ludmir88

    if the world doesn't end.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 1:38 a.m. CST

    Luke is not a Jedi in Empire

    by Dominic-Vobiscum

    In training, yes, but he's ruled by his emotions and he uses his blaster just as much if not more than his lightsaber.<br><br> You could even make the argument that he's never a full-on Jedi, even at the end of Return, and that the title refers to the redemption of Anakin and the return of the ideals of the Jedi rather than Luke becoming a Jedi. How long did he study with Yoda? Like 8 months? He's just a snappier dressed Padawan with a better haircut.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 1:58 a.m. CST

    Luke was trained by ObiWan's ghost

    by the milf lover

    and a uber-geriatric Yoda... how the hell could he have really become a Jedi? He was just hacking it on impulse.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 1:58 a.m. CST

    If they give a shit about the charaters

    by Wheel99

    and stay as close to the source material as they can then it will be a hit.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 1:59 a.m. CST

    Iron Man II & The Avengers will be GREAT!

    by california_mtz

    Favreau had a genius-like touch on Iron Man. His attention to detail would rival Walt Disney's. We are all very lucky that he is executive producing Avengers. I'm not worried about the release date of Iron Man II, the second time around is so much easier for everything.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 1:59 a.m. CST

    Why 2 parts?

    by Melvin_Pelvis

    this is a trick, right?>p> quit messin around man

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 2:29 a.m. CST

    IRONMAN's 'shadow' is.. THE DARKN KNIGHT

    by onezeroone

    Do you think interview with Nolan will have IRONMAN in it as much as Dark Knight was in this interview?<P>yep, they're very different movies and all.. but at end of day, TDK is a much bigger phenomenon than Ironman.<p>

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 2:38 a.m. CST

    The Avengers story

    by Melvin_Pelvis

    don't do the Hank hit Jan thing<p> Both characters are so much more than that<p> I don't know how they got caught in that loop<p> and when it was first told, it was a story worth telling<p> but all you comic writer guys<br> please stop

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 2:54 a.m. CST

    Nick Fury after Credits was a HUGE mistake

    by most excellent ninja

    most reports have only a few people left who watch it, should have been after the animation credits at the end. this is why the tony stark cameo wasn't at the end of incredible hulk. more people would have seen the nick fury part if it was early in the credits.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 3:08 a.m. CST

    And... why did they ass-fuck Terrence Howard?

    by MaxTheSilent

    Does Favreau have an answer to that?

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 3:25 a.m. CST

    Max...pay attention

    by ShiftyEyedDog2

    in Part One's intro he clearly states the interview was done PRIOR to the Howard/Cheadle thing.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 3:57 a.m. CST

    If they were really payign attention...Eastwood would be Nick Fu

    by Monkey_King

    and Terrence Howard would not have gotten 'fucked' out of a plum role that's retardedly going to older and skinnier actor Don(I played Sammy Davis Jr) Cheadle.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 4:36 a.m. CST

    Fuck you Favreau you fat piece of shit!

    by ganymede3010

    From this point forward I won't believe anything your lard ass has to say. What you, Downey, and Marvel did to Terrance Howard was shady is shit. Don Cheadle is going to fucking blow as Warmachine. You have ticked off your fanbase. And I can't wait for Marvel to turn on your fat ass and give this Franchise to someone else, which will happen sooner or later. Believe it. Marvel ruins everything.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 5:08 a.m. CST

    ganymede

    by ledbetter51

    Dude, calm down. Unless you have some info the rest of us don't then you have no idea what happened between Howard, Favreau, Downey and Marvel. It sucks that there's going to be some loss of continuity, but I'm pretty confident Cheadle will be good-to-great as Rhodes/War Machine because he's been good in pretty much everything I've seen him in. Maybe it'll turn out that you're right and Howard got shafted, but for now you're post sounds like some reactionary bullshit to me. And since when does Marvel ruin everything? They've made two movies so far and they were both good.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 5:19 a.m. CST

    Luke didn't use a blaster in Empire.

    by I Dunno

    And what's the story with Terrance Howard? And who is Terrance Howard? I guess I don't remember that movie very well.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 5:29 a.m. CST

    Favreau's the devil all of a sudden?

    by Droid

    Do people have some insider knowledge about the IM2/Howard sitch that I haven’t seen? How the fuck do you people know what Fav & Downey did? The quote I’ve read from Howard was that he was ‘surprised’ that ‘good-faith negotiations aren’t held up’. To me, that translates as he was demanding too much money. But that's just me speculating. Granted, Marvel should have told him that he was getting replaced, but whatever the reasons, he’s out, Cheadles in. Get over it.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 5:32 a.m. CST

    More importantly...

    by Droid

    Avatar is just over one year away! Hurry the fuck up Christmas 2009!

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 5:44 a.m. CST

    Bring a mop to Avatar

    by hallmitchell

    So you can clean up the fanboys brains on the seat of the cinema. This will blow minds.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 5:45 a.m. CST

    How come noone knows

    by hallmitchell

    What happened to Terence? In this day and age?

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 5:49 a.m. CST

    Terrance Howard

    by HEADGEEK

    I haven't spoke with Jon about why Howard isn't going to be in the film, but I have spoke with some other filmmakers that have met with Terrance these days - and he hasn't been exactly as cool as one would think. <BR><BR>Now - before you think I'm slamming on Terrance, you need to remember - AICN was one of the first places anywhere trumpeting and cheering for him. I fucking love him on camera and love his character in IRON MAN - and was dying to see him move forward. <BR><BR>Having said that, I've also worked with Favreau - and frankly - he's great people. He's somebody that extends the definition of Family from just blood relations to the people you surround yourself with. The people you work with. <BR><BR>Now - Howard's non-involvement is either one of two things. He was either making demands (financial or creative) that the production wasn't willing to address to the degree that would make Terrence happy - and you should know, if it is financial, that'd be a MARVEL decision... <BR><BR>But Terrance and Cheadle have a very similar pay scale currently. So I can't imagine it is financial. <BR><BR>The other factor it could be is if Terrence made himself difficult to work with, I have heard some very weird things about him recently, that is the sort of thing I don't repeat, but I do know if he pulled these types of things around Jon... I completely would see why Howard would be shown the door. <BR><BR>That said - no matter who is at fault, it is sad to see Howard's involvement go. But Cheadle is a great actor - and a fantastic person by all accounts. And as an actor, I can see his personality working quite well in scenes with Robert Downey Jr. We'll see, it is an early "DAMN" on the project, but there's not a single thing wrong with Cheadle. At least in my opinion

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 5:55 a.m. CST

    "Good faith negotiations"? In Hollywood?

    by I Dunno

    If it's not written down, it didn't happen. Anyone who got that far in Hollywood should know that.<p>Funny, Robert Downey Jr looked just like Don Cheadle in Tropic Thunder.</p>

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 5:58 a.m. CST

    Repeat please!

    by Carl XVI Gustaf

    "I have heard some very weird things about him recently, that is the sort of thing I don't repeat"

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 6:31 a.m. CST

    @I Dunno

    by Dominic-Vobiscum

    He doesn't FIRE his blaster, but he shows preference for (potentially) using his blaster over using the lightsaber multiple times. On Degobah he pulls out his blaster instead of his lightsaber twice. Once when R2 gets temporarily eaten and once when Yoda shows up. And when he's walking through the hallways of Bespin he's got his blaster out and doesn't put it away and pull out the lightsaber till Vader turns his lightsaber on. A real Jedi wouldn't even be carrying around a blaster because it's an inelegant weapon and so forth.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 6:31 a.m. CST

    i think the plot theme for the 2

    by DRACULA_WANTS_THE_AMULET

    will revolve around tony coming to terms wiht the mistake he made in declaring himself as iron man. he will build a suit that functions on it's own and stage something so he and the suit are seen in the same scene- so people stop believing he is iron man, but the the suit will go rouge on him. something like that. Sorta how batman created the jokers big game. tony fucked up by revealing himself as iron man and bad shit is going to happen and he will try to trick everyone into thinking he is not iron man.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 6:47 a.m. CST

    the true reason for Howard being cut must be told

    by DRACULA_WANTS_THE_AMULET

    Hollywood politics are fucking bullshit!!! Plain and simple there are no real friends there. It's all about how hot you are, and what your last film did. <P> And by that post Harry, it sounds like your ready to quietly push this issue under the carpet to help the film move forward. <P> Well I'll say this. Some of the fans won't stop talking about it, until the real answer is given. And as fans I think we are entitled to those real answers. <P>Fav and Howard need to say it in the same room or over a phone. <P>Yeah it could get nasty, but the lies won't hide anymore. <P> The Maggie replacment in TDK- was Katies choice to leave. Cause the bitch is fucking nuts. OK, we could accept that. <P>We can't accept this, and the fact that certain rumors are flying about. Dealing wiht the real reason Howard ain't coming back, and you are in the know, and the rest of the world isn't allowed to be privileged. Fuck man Hollywood is like the social structure of popularity in high school. The fucking bullshit amazes me!!!!! It really does. Everyone stands over their own private toilet bowl inhaling their brand smiling. thinking it, and them are better than the rest. Sometimes someone needs to glove up a hand, reaches in, and smears that shit in that self absorbed fuckers face!

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 6:54 a.m. CST

    Luke's blaster

    by vadakinX

    The thing you have to remember though is that, as Vader said: "You are not a Jedi yet." <p> Luke had gotten a crash course in the Jedi arts (I wonder if he did saber training with Yoda....maybe in the Ultra-Hyper-Special Edition haha) and was probably still more comfortable with a blaster. <p> Also, in the Dagobah cave he used his lightsaber and when it came time to confront Vader on Bespin he used his lightsaber as well. Luke was always on the back foot during that duel, getting in a couple of lucky shots here and there but it was clear that he wasn't entirely comfortable with the lightsaber. <p> In Return of the Jedi, he tried to use a blaster to kill Jabba though that was all part of a ridiculously elaborate plan. Once he got his lightsaber from Artoo he looked more comfortable and was clearly a more experienced Jedi though it should be noted that Obi-Wan used a blaster to kill General Grevious so it's not unheard of for Jedi to use them in extreme circumstances. <p> I wouldn't be too hard on Luke though as there is a clear progression from the blaster toting farmboy in A New Hope to the confident, saber-wielding Jedi in Return Of The Jedi.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 7:22 a.m. CST

    Fantastic Four

    by EddieBlake

    So...was Favs saying that Marvel would like to redo the Fantastic Four movies themselves? Hell, if that's the case, Fox needs to dump them back to Marvel quick so they can get a great Fantastic Four movie on the fast track!

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 7:28 a.m. CST

    Likeability?

    by brobdingnag

    Hardly. Downy is a very good (not great) actor but he is not likable in fact I remember him and Favreau being pretty big assholes to their interviewers during filming. You like him because he needs the site and so he acts friendly to you and you believe it.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 7:49 a.m. CST

    Marvel's Manhattan Beach Complex

    by RenoNevada2000

    The way Favreau describes Marvel's new studio setup reminds me of the old school days of the Marvel Bullpen. This can only be good.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 7:56 a.m. CST

    Dracula Amulet...

    by Deathpool

    I would love to know the reasons too, but I'm not close to either of the men involved. I'm not part of the studios involved. And neither are you and a lot of other people. That means we don't have any right to know. That may sound harsh, but that's how it is in businesses. People are fired or leave from all types of jobs, and when that happens its a private matter between those involved that the public has no right to know. The slang for it is 'talking out of school'. Harry wasn't saying "nyah nyah I know and you don't!", he was simply explaining why the reasons weren't discussed by him or anyone else. And they are valid reasons. Like I said before, I would love to know myself what happened, but I nor anyone else should feel we have a RIGHT to know. Because we don't.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 8:15 a.m. CST

    Dracula...

    by Droid

    I like Jack Daniels whisky. If for some reason the CEO of JD fires the master distiller, I, like every other consumer, have no right to know why it happened. Sure, it'd be good to know why, but being a fan of something doesn't automatically entitle you to insider knowledge.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 8:16 a.m. CST

    MaxTheSilent:

    by beatleMatt

    ..they ass fucked him because he demanded WAY too much money for what the role was. Why would you pay a supporting actor as much as the star? Fuck that. Good riddance. A shaved sheep could play that role - and better.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 8:28 a.m. CST

    At the very least...

    by GaiustheBrave

    you never hear an Abrams-ism coming from Favreau. "Well, you know, Iron Man and comics are just so silly. How do I take this seriously? I don't even really like Iron Man. Let's make Iron Man good for once and not suck." That's me doing JJ Abrams directing Iron Man. Thank you and good night.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 8:38 a.m. CST

    Airing Dirty Laundry

    by DRACULA_WANTS_THE_AMULET

    thats what they call it where I come from. But Howard said he didn't ask for a pay raise if i remember correctly, and that was disputed. So now you really only have a few things left. Howard is difficult to work with or demanded more of his character in the sequel then they wanted to provide. Or the big guys who run the show just didn't feel like he was working. And there you go. Can't think of much more than that.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 8:39 a.m. CST

    I meant "The Payraise wasn't disputed"

    by DRACULA_WANTS_THE_AMULET

    Damn I got up too early today..

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 8:49 a.m. CST

    Terence Howard

    by seagrass

    wasn't bad, but let's all be honest here: Cheadle can act circles around him. Continuity is a great thing and all, but I'd rather have the better actor instead.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 8:53 a.m. CST

    So...

    by I AM ROCKO

    ...will there be a sequel to the latest Hulk film before he appears in The Avengers? Will Norton return? I know there is a stand alone Thor film on the horizon, is that ditto for Cap America? So confused...

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 8:57 a.m. CST

    DRACULA_WANTS_THE_AMULET

    by seagrass

    *is* Terence Howard. No wonder no one wants to work with him!

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 8:58 a.m. CST

    Rocko...

    by GaiustheBrave

    MTV interviewed the producer, Hale, I think her name was. I can't remember her name, but, she said she wants to make more HUlk films, but we'll see him on screen before his next film, ala The Avengers. Norton is supposed to return, but seems about as confused as anyone else as to when...according to the article.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 9:01 a.m. CST

    oops, her name is Gale Anne Hurd

    by GaiustheBrave

    go to superherohype.com and scroll down. I'm so awful at paraphrasing...

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 9:03 a.m. CST

    Re: Hulk

    by seagrass

    Skipped it in the theater (wish I hadn't), picked it up on DVD, and quite enjoyed it. Love to see the deleted scenes re-incorporated...I think they would have made it a much stronger film overall. I wonder how much of the cut footage (if any) were Norton's contributions...anyone know?

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 9:11 a.m. CST

    Incredible Hulk wasn't great...

    by rev_skarekroe

    ...it was just ok. Better than Lee's, but I'd be surprised if they did Hulk 2, frankly (though they've already set up a villain). Hopefully they can convince Norton to be in Avengers.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 9:35 a.m. CST

    GaiustheBrave:

    by ShiftyEyedDog2

    That sounded more like everything Michael Bay was saying about Transformers.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 9:54 a.m. CST

    Conan O'Brien as Captain America!

    by DerLanghaarige

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 10:25 a.m. CST

    GaiustheBrave:

    by I AM ROCKO

    Cheers for the heads up mate. I enjoyed the latest Hulk, but did not think it was brilliant but would like to see the character return in other films and be part of the Avengers. I know it only did average business at the box office and Norton was annoyed with the producers etc so a direct sequel is not as surefire as Iron Man 2. Wonder if DC will start to go this way with their characters towards the Justice League, although at the moment I cannot see Superman living in the same universe as Nolan's Batman, depends on the reboot they are doing I guess...

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 10:31 a.m. CST

    If Norton is in Avengers

    by two fathoms deep

    I hope he doesn't pull his ego-trip antics and let the right movie be made. He'll probably be crying if Hulk isn't the most prominently featured character. I could go for Hulk being the villian for a while in the Avengers universe.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 10:35 a.m. CST

    Quint (et al), seriously, answer me this..

    by JackLint

    Why don't you ever post the entire interview as an mp3 so that we can download it and listen to it later? Especially a nice long interview like this. I think the sound-o-text clips are extremely pointless since it only offers like 90 seconds at a time - and I'm in the middle of reading it anyway! You guys linked to that great interview with charlie kaufman a few weeks back, why can't you do somthing like that yourself? Please answer, I'd like to know.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 10:41 a.m. CST

    One thing HULK had over Iron Man

    by DoctorWho?

    ...was a better score. Saw it again on DVD and really enjoyed it.<p> I could listen to Favs talk for another 2 hrs. He loves what he does and we're lucky to have him overseeing The Avengers.<p> I am dying to know how the hell they're going to approach THOR...script, tone etc. and how they're going to blend it seamlessly with the more 'reality' based films. Anyone got any clue on this? Harry? Mori? Favs...jump in here and give us a heads up!

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 10:55 a.m. CST

    I met Favreau outside the Super Bowl

    by Beezbo

    A good day for Beezbo - I'm at the best Super Bowl ever played and I meet one of my favorite film makers. And he was wearing a Giants jersey!

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 10:57 a.m. CST

    Terrence being sued for 5 mill for punching a dude...

    by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD

    <p> Los Angeles (E! Online) – Rough month for Terrence Howard. First he's bounced from Iron Man 2. And now he has been tagged with a $5 million lawsuit.<p> The onetime Oscar nominee is facing allegations of assault from Tex Allen, the composer of the Broadway revival of Cat on a Hot Tin Roof that Howard headlined last winter. Allen, a jazz pianist and brother of Cat's director, Debbie Allen, claims he was punched in the kisser by Howard during a rehearsal back in January.<p> Neither Tex Allen nor a rep for the show could be reached for comment on the suit, which was first reported in the New York Post. But Howard's publicist, Michelle Benson, says the flap is much ado about nothing.<p> "We are aware of the allegations and expect this frivolous suit to be dismissed," she tells E! News.<p> Howard has been making the rounds promoting his debut pop album, Shine Through It, which hit stores in September.<p>

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 11 a.m. CST

    The Avengers...

    by two fathoms deep

    should be about Iron Man and Captain America primarily, and I don't know how he'll feel about being not in the limelight the whole time. I don't really care for the Hulk much, for the record. I just can't get behind a big cartoon character in a live action movie. That's all I see in Hulk.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 11:08 a.m. CST

    I keep saying this...

    by Archive

    ...but Quint, these kinds of interviews are really useful for budding filmmakers like myself - just hearing how Jon is using filmmakers he admires to step outside the box and rethink the filmmaking process challenges me to get that much more out of the resources at my own disposal. Thank you, sir!

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 11:14 a.m. CST

    On the subject of Terrence Howard,

    by Archive

    I actually know a handful of USMC fighter jocks, and one of my good friends has the smarts and the good-natured demeanor of Terrence Howard in particular, and for all that, Terrence did not convince me that he was a marine. Some things, Marines are trained to be intense about. Cheadle can carry that intensity. Howard did not, in Iron Man. Rhodey is a good guy and a pal to the end, and at the same time, he's also a part of the Green Machine. It's more than just a throwaway line over sake, and a few reproachful glowers thrown towards Robert Downey Jr. It's a conviction, and that's what Terrence Howard was lacking.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 11:19 a.m. CST

    To put it another way,

    by Archive

    War Machine should be able to stand up to Nick Fury. Armor or no, Terrence Howard's Rhodey would have gotten his sally ass handed to him by Samuel Jackson's Nick Fury.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 11:30 a.m. CST

    I don't get the idea that Cheadle is tougher...

    by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD

    .....than Howard. Howard would break that fool in half. Cheadle is a fucking pussy that always looks like he is about to cry. Where do you guys get that he is more intense?

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 11:32 a.m. CST

    'Fixing' "I am Iron Man."

    by mbeemer

    Tony Stark can discredit that statement very easily. "Hey, just messing with you! If you guys wanted to believe that, it wouldn't matter WHAT I said..." and so on. A good disinformation campaign (and a couple of staged IM appearances with Stark in the vicinity) and no one believes that silly press speculation.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 11:42 a.m. CST

    DGD

    by oisin5199

    it's really the other way around - Howard always looks like he's going to cry. Whereas Cheadle is a wiry guy whose played some characters who will quietly fuck you up. I was impressed by Howard's approach to the film in interviews, but when I saw him in the movie, I was disappointed. I didn't buy him as a high-ranking military guy for a second, especially with his effeminate voice. Cheadle can pull this off much better. I see Rhodey as a bigger guy, but Cheadle could act the role better.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 11:49 a.m. CST

    Cheadle in Devil in a Blue Dress...

    by Droid

    would fuck you up as soon as look at you.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 11:56 a.m. CST

    Too bad TDK came out after Iron man

    by Bong

    Totally forgot about IM...

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 12:15 p.m. CST

    yeah Cheadle in Rwanda or Oceans....

    by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD

    ...could really fuck up Terrence in Hustle. What the fuck are you people on?!

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 12:22 p.m. CST

    Yeah Howard in Glitter or The Perfect Holiday...

    by Droid

    could really fuck up... wait... whats your point?

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 12:30 p.m. CST

    Uh, Rhodes isn't a marine.

    by rev_skarekroe

    At least not in the movie. He's Air Force.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 12:32 p.m. CST

    I dunno......I don't have a point.

    by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD

    I liked Iron Man, but I don't really give a shit about seeing anymore with that character. Just make it a one shot thing. All kidding aside, I really don't think I'd pay to see a sequel. Which is weird-- I thought the first was one of the best 5 films of 08. Interesting.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 1:09 p.m. CST

    Fuck Terrance Howard

    by Damage_Inc

    He was so bland in IM, it made me want to puke. And he also seems like a prick in real life. They should never even have cast that guy to begin with.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 1:12 p.m. CST

    DANNYGLOVERS

    by Damage_Inc

    I know what you mean. The thought of a sequel to IM does nothing for me. I'm not excited at all, and I don't know why.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 1:19 p.m. CST

    not caring about a sequel....

    by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD

    Maybe its just the essence of the material. It was a fun film and they made the character interesting. But our brain probably thought "Whats the big picture here?" at a certain point. Where does it go from there? I think Iron Man himself is interesting, but the world Favreau created around him was so dull and uninspiring, I don't really care what happens to him within it.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 2:06 p.m. CST

    CRIMSON DYNAMO....NOW!!!!

    by superzero

    God, how frikin AWESOME would it be to see him in Iron Man II? I'll tell ya....REEEAL awesome! Hey, Russia is the "bad guy" again so it could work! BTW QUINT: when I saw Iron Man the first time and I saw the 10 rings flag and heard the reference I flipped out in true geek fashion. I didn't catch cap's shield till the dvd came out. By then it was by hitting pause and going frame by frame. I don't know how ANYONE saw that in the theaters.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 3:02 p.m. CST

    Luke's blaster - Jedi ideals.

    by ZeroCorpse

    You forget that there were no other Jedi for Luke to reference. He'd never even SEEN a Jedi, aside from Obi-Wan and Yoda, so saying "it's not the Jedi way" isn't enough of a reason for him to stop using a blaster. He simply had never even THOUGHT of relying on a melee weapon up until he met Obi-Wan, and then he was on the fast-track to being a Jedi Knight so he could be pushed into killing his father and Palpatine (and yes, Yoda and Obi-Wan had a really half-assed plan there). <p> Most Jedi were training in lightsaber combat from childhood onward. Luke had, at best, a couple years of self-training, interspersed with a couple hours of training from the living Obi-Wan, and a couple months (at most. The Dagobah time frame is unclear) from Yoda. We can speculate that Luke was getting training tips from Obi-Wan's spirit, but ultimately, all Luke's lightsaber skills in the movie were self-taught or just natural ability. <p> Considering that he's probably well-trained on the use of a blaster (protecting a moisture farm from Tusken Raiders, Rogue Banthas, moisture rustlers, and Krayt Dragons will do that), I can't say I'd blame him for doubting his ability with an ancient weapon he'd never even seen before he was 20 years old, let alone relied upon it to save his life. <p> Up until his first battle with Vader, Luke uses the lightsaber as a tool, rather than as a weapon. He's completely unsure of his skills, and then once Vader KICKS HIS ASS in Cloud City, he probably goes back to his room, listens for Obi-Wan, and trains like crazy until such time as they can arrange the rescue of Han. <p> Even with that training, if you compare his lightsaber skill with that of Jedi from the Republic era, he looks haphazard and a bit wild. He's all instinct.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 3:04 p.m. CST

    Thor in IM 2? Fantasy vs IM Reality

    by Calico Pete

    I *like* the idea of a "Roger Rabbit" approach to reality. I like the non-"realistic" characters that say to you, hey, this is a comic book movie. I say don't be afraid to put Thor in there, unsullied (at least in the Avengers), or to put MODOK or Fin Fang Foom in there. I'm tired of these worlds were everything's "realistic" except for the one crazy bastard at the center of the frame. Let's loosen things up a bit. Let's have the entire reality shifted a bit out of phase with ours. I WANT Dr. Strange and Thor standing side-by-side with the more realistic Iron Man. I want the crazy! Bring it on and make the movie Marvel U more than just a bunch of Marvel characters in our everyday reality. Give us the feel of Alex Ross's Marvels!

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 3:05 p.m. CST

    Crimson Dynamo

    by ZeroCorpse

    In current Marvel storylines, he's not an enemy. He's just kind of a dick. <p> In fact, ALL of the Winter Guard are jerks to Iron Man AND War Machine, with the exception of Ursa Major, who questions why they have to be such assholes whenever an American superhero shows up.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 3:10 p.m. CST

    i want ULTRON in the avengers movie!

    by Seth Brundle

    come on! how long since we've seen a good killer robot (not cyborg) on screen!!!

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 3:19 p.m. CST

    The scores for both

    by odo19

    Iron Man and The Incredile Hulk were really fucking weak, IMO. Iron Man had a score that sounded like some shitty saturdy morning cartoon, and TIH had one that switched back in forth between a wannabe Bourne score and sappy soap opera shit. I can't believe they ditched Danny Elfman's awesome Hulk theme for that bland garbage.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 3:36 p.m. CST

    HULK requires "motion capture" to feel more real.

    by JDanielP

    I think that the key of making a CGI character seem/look/feel more real (like the HULK, for example)...is to make use of "motion capture" technology, and allow a living, breathing person to perform the movements. Personally, I dislike the movements that are obviously NOT motion-captured, where the movements (sometimes subtle) are too smooth,...when all the character's movements flow at the same pace. I love the motion-captured work in Peter Jackson's "KING KONG" (and his "LORD OF THE RINGS" trilogy goes without saying). And I feel that "motion capture" is a technique that is here to stay.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 3:48 p.m. CST

    When Do We Get News On Captain America

    by Phategod2

    I mean nothing at all.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 4 p.m. CST

    JDan...

    by Droid

    Avatar is going to make sweet, sweet love to your MoCap loving eyeballs... Will the next 13 months please hurry the fuck up!?

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 4:44 p.m. CST

    Calico Pete, Amen

    by 2sdaychicken

    We shouldnt lower the standards to make it real. Iron Man and Thor and Fin Fang Foom are all in comics together, so they should all be in the movies together. It will not seem silly, it will seem awesome. The whole reason people see movies is to LEAVE reality.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 4:53 p.m. CST

    I actually thought Iron Man was kinda lame.

    by 2sdaychicken

    I was never excited about Iron Man, which I found weird cause Im a HUGE marvel fan. Thought it looked bland, and I was right. I didnt do anything bad, which is the most important part. It was just nothing special. The same goes for Hulk. I thought they both needed WAY more action. To me neither of them are in the top 10 of the year. But, since they didnt do anything wrong, the sequels can only be better. Now with the "Marvel Cinematic Universe" created, I cant be more excited for IM2, Thor, and Avengers.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 5:47 p.m. CST

    Great interview, Quint.

    by Devil'sOwn

    And Alexander Skarsgard for Thor!*** The Demon in a Bottle storyline would be a next logical step. I have confidence he could pull it off, he gets it. I don't know what some people who didn't like the first movie expected. Clearly they don't want an Iron Man movie with an engrossing story and intriguing characters. For me, it worked- it took a character I had loved (but was detached from lately), and made him a flawed yet sympathetic, appealing personality. Comparisons to TDK don't work. Just because they were both big superhero summer blockbusters doesn't mean they aren't completely different animals. I didn't see IM in a theater (limited movie funds, chose Hulk and TDK, missed Hellboy 2, also), and wish I had. I know I'll be going to see IM2, which will hopefully feature the Mandarin.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 5:50 p.m. CST

    Luke's lightsabering

    by Keeper Of Chimps

    Luke does pretty well for a guy who never really had any formal training. The real question is why Obi-Wan goes from being the fastest kick-ass lightsaber using jedi in the galaxy to being the really slow old guy he is in Episode 4. I mean, its only been 18 years and Yoda is a hell of a lot older when he fights Dooku and Palpatine.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 6:49 p.m. CST

    Really fucking hyped for Iron Man 2

    by bottombrick

    I liked Ironman a lot, and so did my girlfriend, but the third act sucked and I thought there wasn't enough action. This interview reveals he is bringing on Tartakovsky and going full on action instead of pussyfooting around the unfamiliar cg. And if that wasn't enough he calls out Casino Bournale for dropping the ball and fully intends to pick it up for himself. Favreau is awesome and this movie will kick so much ass.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 6:49 p.m. CST

    Cheadle SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    by ThaJackaL

    Hey Harry get off his dick! Don Cheadle is a terrible actor, and Terrance Howard was part of the reason why IRON MAN was such a good movie. I for one will skip out on IRON MAN 2 is Cheadle is in it. HE IS A TERRIBLE ACTOR!!

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 6:50 p.m. CST

    Don Cheadle.....

    by Screwbini

    ...was also a bad-ass in "Out of Sight". He can definitely pull-off the military tough guy role, and I think he is a better, more versital actor than Howard. Howard has been good in certain roles, but not this one.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 6:52 p.m. CST

    STFU Screwbini Don Chithead sucks!!!

    by ThaJackaL

    Terrance Howard 4 WAR MACHINE

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 7:07 p.m. CST

    Randomisms..

    by MCVamp

    The Iron Monger suit was labled "Crimson Dynamo" in the production art. -- Upon second viewings (both Blu-Ray) I found INCREDIBLE HULK to be the more watchable movie. Norton may not be a charmer with a flashy role, but pound-for-pound I'll take his chops over Downey's 4 out of 5 times, and both films really had the same damn ending--hero vs. a bigger, stronger version of themselves with the love interest watching. -- Terrence Howard seemed a bit...off...for "War Machine." But so does Cheadle, and Cheadle seems a bit too old to boot. Coulda saved money by hiring Morris Chestnut or something. -- Thing about Luke...he seemed specifically trained to take down Vader, but it seemed pretty obvious that the Emperor would wreck up his shit in about 2 seconds. Since Yoda and Ben were pretty much decided Anakin was lost, WHAT THE FUCK DID THEY EXPECT LUKE TO ACCOMPLISH? Granted, the Emperor still goes down with the Death Star, maybe sacrificing Luke was the original objective?

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 8:20 p.m. CST

    bad Interview because....

    by Nuking the Fridge

    The Terrance Howard question should have been asked. Sure Don Cheadle is a better actor, and he should have been in the first film from the beginning. But I really don't like it when films change actors around, it is annoying.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 8:32 p.m. CST

    Fanboys Assemble!

    by Devil'sOwn

    This is Cool News indeed. I think I speak for many of us when I say this has given us something to look forward to. But pay heed, a shitstorm is on the horizon... In the coming years we must be stout of heart, we must not loose faith. We must endure tials and tribulations. We must weather reports of possible directors, changes in script, casting rumors, and production difficulties. And then there are our foes, the dreaded Haters. Brrr. For reasons I will never understand, these miserable villains have a twisted compulsion to bitch about pretty much anything. And they will defend their right to groan to anyone foolish enough to listen. All I can say is that a dildo the size of stout Mjolnir would not satisy their voracious arseholes! They are a major threat to be reckoned with. But we are more than some mere collection of geeks: We are a CULTURE, and we are legion. If the director (whomever that may be) and the script be true, we shall prevail.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 9:20 p.m. CST

    Terrence Howard won't be in IM2 because...

    by Banzai Rootskibango

    ...he's upset that they won't turn Iron Man into a Jehovah's Witness. <P> Also, the opening scene was Howards' characters' birthday party and he refused to do it. <P> Now you know.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 9:22 p.m. CST

    yes both Iron Man and TDK are just "okay"

    by Rupee88

    way fucking overrated, the both of them...both good films which is worth something, but it's amazing what low standards people have or how easily they get turned on by superhero shit that isn't totally fucked up

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 9:22 p.m. CST

    yes both Iron Man and TDK are just "okay"

    by Rupee88

    way fucking overrated, the both of them...both good films which is worth something, but it's amazing what low standards people have or how easily they get turned on by superhero shit that isn't totally fucked up

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 9:25 p.m. CST

    Robert DowneyJr.

    by Mr. Lahey

    should play both Tony Stark and Rhodey in Iron Man 2. Picture it.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 10:27 p.m. CST

    Put Black Widow in Iron Man 2!!!!!!

    by waggy

    Iron Man doesn't have the best rogue's gallery in comics, but he's had plenty of dealings with the Black Widow, and upping the SHIELD involvement would create the perfect opportunity to play up the espionage angle and throw her into the mix. Plus these days having a Russian bad guy doesn't seem like the craziest thing in the world....

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 10:40 p.m. CST

    Whattaya know...

    by Devil'sOwn

    Somebody using the term overrated. You little skeeters sure do like that word don't you? My God, I'm surprised somebody exercised the restraint to not say it before now! Just because a film recieves critical acclaim doesn't make it a good movie, I guess. And just because it is successful doesn't mean everyone's standards aren't as high as yours. Jesus, get over yourself.

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 11:03 p.m. CST

    Nuked

    by Quint

    Yeah, I hate it when interviewers don't use their psychic powers to look into the future and ask questions about stuff that happens AFTER the interview is conducted. What stupid, lazy assholes, right?

  • Oct. 29, 2008, 11:15 p.m. CST

    Terence Howard > Don Cheadle

    by Maniaq

    sorry but I'm just not that enamoured by Cheadle and if you're going to replace Howard then fine - but this guy just seems like the wrong choice to me. <p> I guess it could have been worse - at least it ain't Will Smith! <p> Seriously, tho, there are so many other black actors out there in the same pay scale and with the same level of recognition - and at least as much respect - as Howard (or Cheadle for that matter) who could have been cast for this. <p> Don't get me wrong - Cheadle gotta eat - but I just don't see him fitting into this role comfortably. <p> We'll see...

  • Oct. 30, 2008, 12:23 a.m. CST

    So who's directing Avengers??

    by epitone

    It better be someone pretty good.

  • Oct. 30, 2008, 1:20 a.m. CST

    The Interview

    by SquireWamba

    I thought it was a great interview...I've enjoyed JF since Swingers and am glad for his success and good directorial sense...on a side note, I think being embarrassed for characters in movies is much more powerful than being scared...think about how much you cringe in scenes like JF calling the girl back over and over in Swingers...or DeNiro in King of Comedy...I was cringing the entire time I was so embarrassed for these guys...they did it well...emotional response and I lost track of where I was going with this...anyway, I'm just glad to have this venue to talk back in and show appreciation for good things and scream about the stuff that went wrong (Dr. Doom anyone?) oh yeah...I was heading towards villains...I was never a big fan of the Mandarin...the rings just didn't work for me...I was always excited when he fought Titanium Man or the early Crimson Dynamo...problem is we already had IM fighting another guy in a bigger suit...so where do you go from here? Good luck, Jon!

  • Oct. 30, 2008, 1:49 a.m. CST

    by Pappachubby

  • Oct. 30, 2008, 1:50 a.m. CST

    What about Ron Howard?

    by Pappachubby

    He'd be a good 'Howard' replacement... Just an idea... and as you know, I'm an idea man....

  • Oct. 30, 2008, 1:54 a.m. CST

    I know... that was STUPID!

    by Pappachubby

    But... hey, it's a talkback!

  • Oct. 30, 2008, 4:06 a.m. CST

    Quint: "Well, you walked that tightrope really well"

    by half vader

    ... with IRON MAN though." <p> Quint you idiot! I liked the rest of the interview and thanks for pwning fools like Nuked who are so damn lazy not only do they not read the TB but they don't even read the very start of the interview! <p> Anyway, the tightrope walking comment was moronic in light of the biggest criticism of the film - made by many many AICN readers on these boards - that we'd already seen the best bits of the movie and there were no real surprises because we saw all the major beats in the MANY trailers. <p> Tightrope my arse.

  • Oct. 30, 2008, 5:17 a.m. CST

    COME ON QUINT - ASK *ONE* TOUGH QUESTION

    by geraldbeans

    Ask him if he's pissed that they're not allowing him a year to write the film and how he thinks that will ultimately affect the finished movie. Jeez. The guy's gotten a ton of mileage from this site. It wouldn't hurt to ask ONE FUCKING TOUGH QUESTION! JUST ONE!

  • Oct. 30, 2008, 5:27 a.m. CST

    And thank God Favreau

    by half vader

    Realises IM and Batman are ostensibly the same character and therefore the tone must be different. And yes I'll jump on the Genndy bandwagon. Can we have Dexter as Stark's mad scientist nemesis? ;)

  • Oct. 30, 2008, 8:13 a.m. CST

    JDanielP...

    by GaiustheBrave

    I agree 100% about motion capture. But, from the bonus featurettes on the Hulk blu-ray, it seems like they did use motion capture extensively on Incredible Hulk. There were a couple of times, again it seemed to be suggested, where the animators couldn't use the motion capture and animated on their own. But, for the most part, it was motion capture. Personally, I had no problem with about 80% of the animation, but I've been desensitized to reality by Spider-Man 3. You have to admit, though, the Hulk movements and animation from the college quad-army scene to the cave scene were pretty decent, considering.

  • Oct. 30, 2008, 8:43 a.m. CST

    Thor = Fish-Out-Of-Water Story

    by fiester

    That's how you make it work. It's essentially Crocodile Dundee. You have a Thunder God living among regular people and trying to figure it all out and redeem himself in his father's eyes while fighting against the evil of his far more savvy half-brother. Could be really funny. My only concern is the secondary characters. There has to be some sort of buddy/guide for Thor in the human world. Let's just hope it ain't Shia LeBouf.

  • Oct. 30, 2008, 9:36 a.m. CST

    The Tone of IM

    by Goldfingah

    ...wasn't always the fun/serious dichotomy that came out on the big screen, at least if Robert Downey Jr.'s screen test on the DVD is any indication. Yeah, I've read the criticism that IM was basically just an action-comedy as though it were "Pirates" or the "Zorro" movies, which is basically bullshit. If the rest of the movie had been identical or even similar in tone to the screen test, which had Downey and a Rhodey stand-in exchanging some VERY serious dialogue, quite frankly it would have sucked balls. Here's something very, very basic; Iron Man, the character, flies around in a freaking red and gold suit of armor. How can a story featuring such a character be told with the dour stoicism that has fanboys enamored with TDK? It would have looked ridiculous. The approach to TDK worked wonders for that film and yeah, it's Coke to IM's Pepsi, but any attempt to ape its intensity by transplanting an uber serious Tony Stark into the mix would definitely NOT have worked out. Downey Jr. walked the line just fine. My favorite scene, oddly enough, is his dance with Pepper. I loved the line about forgetting to wear deodorant. I'm kind of holding my breath about what Theroux will bring to the table (loved Tropic Thunder, but I don't know if he can shift gears well enough) but knowing how these things go, there'll be a team of script doctors waiting in the wings if the first draft rings alarm bells. While I understand the hype for the Avengers movie, I think it's kind of important that Marvel gets IM2 right before they can really say they've captured lightning in a bottle. Here's hoping for the best...

  • Oct. 30, 2008, 11:52 a.m. CST

    sorry but comic con buzz has nothing to do with BO

    by lilgorgor

    other huge reactions at comic con: GRINDHOUSE X-FILES 2 SNAKES ON A PLANE

  • Oct. 30, 2008, 12:45 p.m. CST

    yes

    by brandon11

  • Oct. 30, 2008, 12:46 p.m. CST

    jon vavreau is the absolute man

    by brandon11

    he should do all the marvel movies

  • Oct. 30, 2008, 2:49 p.m. CST

    Who's John Vavreau? And Quint...answer to my question?

    by geraldbeans

    I noticed you were quick to jump on the person who tried to call you out on the lack of a Terrance Howard question (which you were obviously waiting for). But absence when called out on a legitimate question. Which is that you didn't ask Favreau a single tough question the entire interview. He was clearly irked by the fast-track of Iron Man 2 and that's really the only thing I wanted to know about. Yet you didn't ask the question. Shame.

  • Oct. 30, 2008, 5:29 p.m. CST

    Not holding my breath

    by Campion

    This has got to be the biggest attempt at collaboration by multiple actors, writers, directors, producers, companies etc. ever attempted. With two movies in the books (Iron Man and Incredible Hulk), they still need to make Iron Man 2, Thor, Captain America movies which are slated by IMDB to be done in 2009, 10, and 11 respectively. Then bring all the actors back to make an Avengers film in what, 2012? And using up all the best villains in the individual movies, probably. Why not add Spider Man and the X-Men to the Avengers film, since it'll be at least 6 or 7 years since those last movies and make one huge clusterfuck! But like I said with everything that has to go right for this to ever happen I'm not holding my breath.

  • Oct. 30, 2008, 6:28 p.m. CST

    Tony Stark and alcoholism in IM 2

    by Chuck_Chuckwalla

    I'm happy to read Jon is going to deal with that part of the Iron Man mythology but disappointed it won't be the core of the movie. He wants the tone to stay fun like the first one throughout the movie. That sounds like a tough challenge to face because alcoholism is a serious thing. I have faith that he can do the story justice on some level but I think it would be far more interesting to see Stark get competely fucked-up. I'm not taking Leaving Las Vegas fucked-up but seems like a missed opportunity to not mine the potential drama and make a truly unique and gut-wrenching super hero film.

  • Oct. 30, 2008, 9:09 p.m. CST

    "It... could... work!!"

    by Devil'sOwn

    Not holding your breath is a sound decision, Campion. As you said, this is unprecendeted. And that's why there's a chance they could pull it off. The Avengers don't have the rabid following of a Spider-Man or an X-Men. Still, they are Marvel's mainstay characters. If they are are introduced in individual movies there will be a built-in familiarity with audiences. I know, a lot depends on those movies being successful, so we'll see. At this stage the idea is scarcely embryonic. We don't know what origin they'll follow. In the comic's history at least, the team formed as a result of Loki's schemes. Where it seems to be heading is that the Hulk is the catalyst. So far, so good. Captain America is the heart, Iron Man is the brain, and Thor is the muscle. I don't especially care about Wasp and Ant-Man, but hey, they could be the sleeper hit pov characters. I'd be even more interested in seeing the Scarlet Witch, Black Widow(love those redheads), Hawkeye(played by Lost's Josh Holloway), and the Vision at some point. And the villain? Ultron, baby!

  • Oct. 31, 2008, 12:39 a.m. CST

    See that's the problem

    by Campion

    I don't read comics, but I'm familiar with Iron Man, Hulk, Capt. America from general knowledge. All those characters you just mentioned. Never heard of 'em. Wasp? Ant Man? Now you've lost me. Batman and Spider-Man have enemies everyone has heard of. In the Iron Man movie he fought an evil iron man. Hulk fought an evil hulky... thing. Just seems a little un-creative compared to Joker, Green Goblin, Doc Ock, etc. Sure Venom was an evil spider-man, but that was in the third movie. By then they didn't even have another villain of any note. I'd never heard of Sandman before that. Now the villains should not be the focus of the movie over the hero(es) (see Batman and Robin), but with the origins out of the way they need to have more attention. Iron Man 2 will be good because of RDJ. Hulk was "meh" at best, and I can't conceive how they put Thor in the world they've created. I hope it all works out.

  • Oct. 31, 2008, 12:45 a.m. CST

    great interview Quint

    by T 1000 xp professional

    the last couple interviews this site has had have truly been a treat. Charlie Kaufman, Jon Fav just to name a few...It really is amazing how Fav learned from the Iron Man and discusses all these very exciting brand new idea that would undoubtedly elevate the sequel.... more news needs to drop about Thor and Cap America especially..any suggestions for directions besides Greengrass lol

  • Oct. 31, 2008, 12:49 a.m. CST

    directors*

    by T 1000 xp professional

  • Oct. 31, 2008, 1:30 a.m. CST

    GaiusTB and friends

    by half vader

    I don't think you understand motion capture's abilities and application super well, no disrespect. Motion Capture is great in the right context, no doubt, but hardly ever is appropriate on its own. Both Hulk (actually BOTH Hulks) and new Kong had a TON of keyframing. Apart from action stuff that can't be performed in the first place, here are two clues. Gravity. Scale. A 6-foot man doesn't have the physics acting on him (and you can't 'act' them either) that a 10 foot monster or 25 foot ape does, not to mention you can't capture someone leaping distances that far outweigh their own mass (because that's what the character requires), not going splat when they swing from a web at high velocity straight onto/into a brick wall (which is what your brain expects and therefore Spidey's antics are rejected), or wrestle a few T-Rex (is that plural too?). Add to that penguins hanging onto a birds legs or tumbling down an avalanche, acrobatic swimming etc. <p> A great example of the limitations of mocap is Polar Express. Hanks may be a good actor, and may have been playing his grown-up character as a child, but when you just mocap it and bolt it onto a virtual kid, the body language, sense of mass and even facial expressions (especially a child's involuntary movements) are wrong wrong wrong and give that creepy feel (I didn't even GET to eyes!). <p> So don't misunderstand and think I'm anti mocap or CG or that I put traditional on a subjective pedestal. I don't. But I don't know that you guys realise just how much of those fave performances/animation was NOT motion-capture. Sure keyframing can smooth things if you don't pa attention, but that also depends on the direction. And as for being here to stay, it's just a 3d extension of rotoscoping, although it could be argued that more stylised designs in 2d vs less stylised movement through rotoscoping created more of a dichotomy than mocap does with 3d cg... <p> Not to mention the catch-22 with all this stuff that fx will NEVER seem 'real' as long as we dream up situations and characters that don't and CAN'T happen in real-life! James Cameron stuff included.

  • Oct. 31, 2008, 2 a.m. CST

    P.S. I'm not dissing Andy Serkis BTW

    by half vader

    He's incredible. But I don't think even he can curl his lip that far or do that with his nose. I bet he can make his ears wiggle though. And his hair does a mean Tony Curtis impersonation!

  • Oct. 31, 2008, 9:36 a.m. CST

    Blending the unreal with the physics of mo-cap actors

    by JDanielP

    half vader, I am impressed with your knowledge. We can argue the nuts & bolts of...HOW...a fictional character (like HULK) is realized. But in the end, we just want results. And where people draw that line may depend on the person...or the director. With Spider-man, I like that his web-slinging looks quite natural (most times?), as if a REAL human body is slinging from web to web. The difference is the...distance...that he covers. So, in that sense, Spider-man's movements can look quite real, though the resulting actions are not. With HULK,...other than the resulting energy-releasing impact of HULK slamming into/onto something, the physics of size and weight do not apply, as the character's POWER overrules "our" laws of physics. However, at the same time, I feel that the natural movements of a "motion captured" performer lends a believability to what we see. If it still doesn't look and feel quite right, then something should be adjusted.

  • Oct. 31, 2008, 8:46 p.m. CST

    How is this not a story yet?

    by Shia LaBeoufs Uncle

    'Iron Man 2': How Terrence Howard Lost His Metal Marvel's decision to recast the role of Col. Jim Rhodes said to be a combination of salary issues and concern about the performance When a summer blockbuster grosses more than $300 million, putting together a sequel is typically as simple as throwing buckets of money at your stars and signing a few pieces of paper. That hasn't been the case with Iron Man 2. It took months for Marvel Studios to lock in director Jon Favreau for the sequel. And reports that Don Cheadle will replace Terrence Howard as Col. Jim Rhodes — a supporting character who seemed poised for a big role in the follow-up after he muttered ''Next time, baby'' to Iron Man's steel suit — hint that IM2 isn't quite as infallible as the superhero at its center. Hollywood insiders believe the exit stems from Terrence Howard's difficult behavior on the set of Iron Man. But those with intimate knowledge of the situation suggest a far more dramatic backstory: Howard was the first actor signed to the film and, on top of that, was the highest-paid. That's right: more than Gwyneth Paltrow. More than Jeff Bridges. More than Robert Downey Jr. And once the project fully came together, it was too late to renegotiate his deal. It didn't help that, according to one source, Favreau and his producers were ultimately unhappy with Howard's performance, and spent a lot of time cutting and reshooting his scenes. (Favreau could not be reached for comment, while Howard's publicist says: ''Terrence had a tremendous experience working on Iron Man.'') As such, when Favreau and screenwriter Justin Theroux went to map out the sequel they found themselves minimizing Howard's story line. Once Marvel learned that Favreau was thinking of curtailing the role, the studio went to the actor's agents with a new and drastically reduced offer — a number that's similar to what supporting cast members were paid for the first movie. The agents, according to sources, were so taken aback by this new figure — estimated at somewhere between a 50 and 80 percent pay cut — that they questioned it. Why did they blanch? Multiple sources say that Marvel execs never told Howard's reps that they had issues with the star's on-set conduct. (Marvel would not comment for this story.) It's unclear whether Howard's team walked away first, or if Marvel ended the discussion at that point. Either way, the studio moved quickly to secure Cheadle and the story leaked out the next morning, Oct. 14. And alas for Howard, there will be no next time.

  • Oct. 31, 2008, 8:46 p.m. CST

    From here:

    by Shia LaBeoufs Uncle

    http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20236884,00.html

  • Nov. 1, 2008, 8:15 a.m. CST

    Sure thing jDaniel - the eternal VFX conundrum

    by half vader

    I absolutely agree about at a certain point, our own or the director's ideas of what's 'right' about some behemoth jumping an inordinate amount become subjective, and the differing logic and latitudes of disparate mediums also come into play. <p> With Spiderman, having him strike the famous poses from the comic mid-swing isn't 'believable' either, but at least it was a conscious decision by the director. Same with Lee and the hopping Hulk. Another one is Jacksons CG-o-riffic (I know there were miniatures in the shot but stay with me) dive down into the goblin mines. I don't like that sort of whizzy-cam business, but appreciate that he thought it was appropriate that you feel an unpleasant dizzy/sickening feeling at our ride through the bowels of that perverted world that culminates in an unholy birth. Not my style, but at least it's not because he doesn't know any better. <p> Yep, even if you get the Spidey swinging and Spidey landing bits right in and of themselves, I don't know that they'll EVER seem 'right' because there's an intrinsic dichotomy between the two parts. If a human (which is our subconscious barometer of everything) was swinging like that, they'd go splat, and conversely if a human DIDN'T go splat, they'd never swing like that (yep things are getting silly semantics-wise but anyway) to land that way. Catch-22, and no amount of realistic rendering or clever animation (and mocap would never be able to do this anyway, hence the FX in the first place) can overcome that misfire between what our brains naturally expect to happen. <p> The thing that comes in then is accepting that we bloody go to see a Spiderman movie BECAUSE we can't see that in real-life. The greatest irony borne out by these TBs is that Fanboys continuously seem to want their suspension of disbelief in movies like this WITHOUT actually having to suspend their disbelief!! They're the WORST at it! And the examples are misguided. They continuously hold up stuff like the first JP as a paragon of realism & believability when the very subject matter makes the argument flawed. It uses every trick in the book to disguise the cg (I'm not knocking it, or the masterful staging), in addition to the fact that we buy into the mass and movement more easily because our only examples of that sort of behaviour are separated by millions of years and different species... Know what I mean? Before that movie everyone thought a T-Rex walked upright! Aaaanyway... <p> And I'm not excusing anything. I can be the world's worst pedant when it comes to traditional OR cg shots, especially when it comes to the most important stuff - character, and eyes. Hell, there are even shots in the awesome Benjamin Button trailer that look wrong wrong wrong to me, because it seems the character doesn't blink right, and for the right character reason. Obviously I'd NEVER try to teach Fincher how to suck eggs or the animation directors he hires, but it brings us neatly back to the whole subjectivity thing and the inescapable fact that if the very premise is 'beyond belief', then the shots at some point will be too... <p> And I'll lay bets now that even if Button is the best thing ever, the FX will look 'wrong' on the character's more extreme shots just by virtue of the whole "CAN'T be real" brain/eye thing. But what we DO get is the sort of thing that opens our intellect and imagination. The book may give us that in an intellectual/more abstract sense, but the projected vision of it gives us a compelling visceral and uh, 'literal' illumination even while the experience-based brain tries to reject it. Ironically the very mismatches that stop us from completely accepting such imagery simultaneously burn it into our heads like an iconification.

  • Nov. 1, 2008, 11:07 a.m. CST

    Err, didn't mean to come off so snobby...

    by half vader

    Geez, I just looked at that Mr. Know-it-all post. Didn't mean to come off like that. I get a bit carried away sometimes.

  • Nov. 1, 2008, 4:45 p.m. CST

    half vader,...how about THIS approach?

    by JDanielP

    First off, I'm getting the feeling that "half vader" is much more in tune to this technology than I am. Any suggested knowledge (of the technology) that I have...is not by training, but rather from a GREAT interest in making movies (and the old-school art training that I do have). That said, I'll share my perspective,...perhaps with more questions than answers. --I figure that there will come a day...when...a cgi/motion-captured character (like HULK) will be governed by an established rule of physics, programmed (within the virtual world) with limits. Think of it as a video game...where...instead of using a controller, you wear a "motion capture" suit. Sometimes, I find (some) movements of fantasy characters within a video game...as looking more life-like than cgi characters we see in movies. And why is that? Is it money? Can we not (afford to) apply physics (real or fictional) to fantasy characters in film, just as we see in video games? I think that...the ability to tweak REAL WORLD PHYSICS for specific fantasy characters, while utilizing "motion capture",...plus maintaining the REAL WORLD PHYSICS of everything else (cgi or filmed),...would, as combined, offer great results. Just imagine a band creating music, if music was a visual medium. Perhaps it's just a matter of...how...all the instruments play together, guided by the talent behind them.

  • Nov. 3, 2008, 8:26 a.m. CST

    Hey JDaniel

    by half vader

    if you're still out there, yep they do have massive, which is the LOTR crowd A.I. stuff . It evolved from flocking simulations which now incorporate a lot more physics in addition to the A.I. The one that's popular now is Euphoria which is used in that Force Unleashed game and the upcoming (though nobody's heard what's happening with it for ages) Indy game. It's been used photoreal for ads and stuff too. There's also the digital Molecular Matter stuff which replicates the physical properties of materials like rock, steel, wood and so on. So when your character slams into it, instead of breaking in some pre-assigned path, it buckles or splinters or breaks the right way (and being physics-based, differently every time). So that's sort of the way forward at the moment rather than mocap which starts to become redundant when you tweak it with all those factors. HOWEVER (bomm-bomm-bomm!), it hasn't been done with superhero characters (except sort of Ang Lee's Hulk - more in a sec) and even if it WAS applied this way, think about it. Say we dial up the strength of the character, and we also have to dial up stuff like the physical strength of the skin, breaking point of bones, etc. You know what happens then? Your brain STILL rejects it because it says, "hang on, that skin isn't like skin, it's like steel because it's not tearing or breaking with all that trauma!". So we're sorta back to subjectivity/square one. We've just spent millions to realise it... The problem with REAL WORLD PHYSICS is that once you change reality by introducing a fantasy element - it's no longer REAL! <p> Back to 2003 Hulk though, the Hulkdog sequence that everybody despise so much used both hard and softbody physics for the interaction, and to be fair, everybody hated the IDEA of Hulkdogs (which is fanboys splitting fantasy hairs, but that's another story), but they didn't really trash the execution. You can also see a lot of physics/procedurally-based stuff in what they call "secondary animation" on characters. Cloth simulation for clothes, automatically bulging muscles and skin sliding over them, not to mention weighted to jiggle and react like say, a 25-foot-tall Kong or big green hulk (which is another reason a man in a suit or a performer doing mocap will NEVER be right as is - they don't WEIGH as much or deal with the resistance of either their own bodies or gravity the way a huge (or tiny) creature would. So having mocap supplemented by this stuff in addition to keyframing is definitely the way to go to balance both the high movement demands of a photoreal character (the more stylised the look, the more you can styllise the movement). In the first JP they had to animates skin jiggles by hand (I think Casper was the first film to have auto-jiggle from memory)! And enveloping wasn't great and you'd still get skin mesh 'tearing', even on Dragonheart you can see the skin still was sort of 'elastic' in parts and didn't expand, contract and slide properly. It also takes a PERSON to say well, the bits between these more pebble-like scales can contract, but not the scales themselves. The computer will never 'know' that stuff by itself. There was some crappy gas-like particle simulation in that too. It looked like they did one pass of the canned stuff from Maya and didn't tweak it at all, hence it looked super-digital, all single-sized particles, no clump or micro-eddies... <p> One example I use all the time is Jumanji. Sure Jurassic Park fooled us because they SORT OF moved like animals we know, but in Jumanji you're dealing with actual animals doing things animals don't really do. The scene where the lion comes down the steps is a great textbook case. Sure, fur rendering was still in its infancy, but even if that thing LOOKED completely real, with everything moving and looking like perfection, it would still seem fake, and ALWAYS will no matter how great the tech. Because the PERFORMANCE was all wrong. It's a wild lion, right? It's never been in a house before, right? Never moved over something as alien as a staircase. So how does that affect it? Everything changes - its body language is wary but also stop/start, hesitant then too hyper when reacting. Base instincts for protection. So it doesn't stroll leisurely down the staircase then measuredly turn and growl. It slips a bit on polished surfaces, overcorrects, the head and eyes are jittery, it could well attack someone. And a computer can never 'know' that unless you feed it so much stuff you could have just animated it yourself to start with. And you know what else? Apart from supplemental proprietary stuff, EVERYONE these days uses the same programs to do it. But it's still the old guard like Phil Tippet and Dennis Muren that do the BEST digital stuff. Because they know performance, and also think laterally to achieve the desired result. Whether that's traditional OR digital. So it all gets back to subjectivity again. <p> As for money, no I still think more R&D comes from film than Games, broadly speaking. Although things are more muddy now with crossover, shared assets and all. TIME is a big thing though. Mummy 2 didn't suck because ILM were incapable, it sucked because they had no TIME due to some marketing idiot thinking it was of the utmost importance that the film be released on the anniversary of the first one, ready or not. I bet that person also loves to see their trip-meter turn over to a big number, too. Actually you know what, Mummy 2 was shit regardless. <p> Sorry it took me a while to get back to you dude. Super busy.

  • Nov. 3, 2008, 11:23 a.m. CST

    Interesting stuff, half vader.

    by JDanielP

    Thanks for the reply, vader. I find this subject to be quite interesting. I admit...that I feel a bit overwhelmed in the science, though I feel a need for understanding (to some degree). And I do get it. I grasp what you're saying. And the conclusion that I've come to...is that, as technology advances, physics will be applied in more detail. For fantasy characters such as (THE INCREDIBLE) HULK, I foresee that the physical properties of his body, from skin to bone to muscle, will (and should) be different,...which would obviously affect physics. (To a degree, sure, they can smooth CGI with motion-capture.) HULK's skin SHOULD be tougher than steel mesh, while his muscle should be stronger than interwoven cable-wire. And HULK's bones should, arguably, be the strongest material (organic or otherwise) on the planet (in the Marvel Universe). When they can tweak physics and blend mo-cap with a sharper, judgmental eye,...perhaps we will see a more fantastic mother nature. (Thanks again, half vader.)

  • Nov. 3, 2008, 11:58 a.m. CST

    Terrance Howard and WOMEN WHO USE TOILET PAPER:

    by FleshMachine

    Terrence Howard Won't Date Women Who Use Toilet Paper TERRENCE HOWARD refuses to date women who don't use moistened tissue on visits to the toilet - as they are "not completely clean". The actor insists potential female suitors must not rely solely on toilet tissues in the bathroom, and even goes to the trouble of advising any partners to make the switch to baby wipes if they don't already use them. He tells Elle magazine, "If they're using dry paper, they aren't washing all of themselves. It's just unclean. "So if I go inside a woman's house and see the toilet paper there, I'll explain this. And if she doesn't make the adjustment to baby wipes, I'll know she's not completely clean.

  • Nov. 3, 2008, 5:06 p.m. CST

    I hope William Hurt is in the Avengers

    by ransomz

    He was really the most spot-on casting for the Hulk. He was pretty much exactly like I pictured General Ross. Hopefully he will continue as Ross in the future Marvel projects, regardless of what happens with the rest of the Hulk cast.

  • Nov. 4, 2008, 4:04 a.m. CST

    i woke up this morning and i cant find my mark 3

    by Jonny_boba

    this guy has his head screwed in straight when it comes to director/fan relationship and damn it he's rite i dont want to see my presents before christmas! just like episode 1 trailer when the whole double bladed lightsaber was revealed, i would have gone crazy with excitment if the first time i saw that was in the cinema! With favareau it seems we have a very respectful fanboy turned film director that loves what he is doing, long may it continue.

  • Nov. 4, 2008, 8:59 a.m. CST

    Jonny Boba you're as crazy as Quint.

    by half vader

    Like I said ALL the major beats of the story are given away in the many trailers they put out. The presents before Christmas analogy is stupid because that's EXACTLY what they DID do! Maybe Favs was working on the thing and didn't watch 'em all to realise "Oh Shit!" but God almighty! And I can fully understand the studio and their marketing people stressing that no-one knew who the hell Iron-Man was (remember you're a tiny part of the equation fanboys), and they couldn't just say "Hey everyone, he's pretty much exactly Batman", so of COURSE they overexposed it. <p> I loved the film, but this bullshit about not showing your cards/Christmas presents is revisionist history garbage. When I finally DID see the film the only disappointment I had (besides the Fury bit which squanders the tight ending) was "Fuck! That's IT?!" and wishing I could revise my own history and un-see the trailers I kept playing beforehand. You out there Favs? Quint?

  • Nov. 4, 2008, 9:13 a.m. CST

    No probs JDaniel

    by half vader

    But I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. If Hulk's flesh and bones reflect the physics qualities of steel or something so strong like that, our brain will just say, hang on - that's NOT flesh! Do you see what I mean? If the flesh LOOKS like flesh but doesn't ACT like it in terms of physics, our brains will still reject it. I can intellectually understand him hopping kilometres at a time, but it will NEVER match even the maximum amount of exertion of a being with that much mass and the fact that he's acting against regular old gravity. <p> One thing I meant to say in that other post - even in your brave new world of amazing computer-physics, show me a simulation where a human can FLY (of their own volition as opposed to being thrown)! It will NEVER be 'solved', because it's INHERENTLY unsolvable. You know... if God had meant us to fly he would have given us wings/he wouldn't have invented aeroplanes. Huh?! Huh?! ;)

  • Nov. 4, 2008, 9:41 a.m. CST

    "...if God had meant us to fly..."

    by JDanielP

    God. I wonder how "God" plays out with the science of physics, etc. In that sense, why should we have such difficulty in making fantasy characters feel more believable???

  • Nov. 4, 2008, 3:32 p.m. CST

    Uh, it was a joke mate

    by half vader

    and turn of phrase. I even put a winky guy there. Not making fun of you. You avoided the main point too. Maybe I just shoulda said the more overt aeroplane one...

  • Nov. 4, 2008, 4:57 p.m. CST

    Uh, mine was too, ...to a degree. --Sorry.

    by JDanielP

    No voice inflection. (I should have used one question mark, too.) As to skin being tougher, etc... I may be more forgiving, in loyalty to the character (and to his/her powers). --I can only imagine and hope that people do the best that they can.