I learned this morning that Marvel Studios boss David Maisel very recently put out an offer to Jon Favreau to direct the sequel and that the offer is "definitely" richer than what the helmer received for the original. 
Even so, the negotiation has only just begun. So all that Internet blather about how Marvel doesn't want to bring back Favreau because the studio is lowballing him is just b.s. As an insider told me, "They're not paying him the same wage. They're definitely paying him a higher fee to direct this one. What, do people think Marvel is stupid? Of course, the movie was successful, so they're offering him more."
Duh.
I never doubted it and said so a month ago.
Vic
Comment by ScreenRant.com — June 11, 2008 @ 12:21 pm
Can we say “Damage Control”??
Comment by Not naive — June 11, 2008 @ 12:47 pm
I don’t think that an offer necessarily negates the rumours that have been flying around, particularly of Marvel wanting to do a second on the cheap and cash in a little bit more.
Mind you, I can’t see them doing a second without him or the original cast, and that already spells money.
Comment by Richard Brunton (Filmstalker) — June 11, 2008 @ 1:58 pm
I wouldn’t call marvel stupid. I will call them cheap (anyone who has attended one of their two premieres would no doubt agree), so the idea that they would lowball Favreau is by no means outside the realm of possibility.
Comment by heypal — June 11, 2008 @ 2:30 pm
If the rumours were true I’d think that Marvel had been infected by what I call the Studio Trilogy Curse. It sort of goes like this.
1. The first movie, with affordable stars and director, is a big hit. Studio makes mega-bucks.
2. Studio offers more money to the principals for a sequel. But then proceed to nickel and dime the production into the ground, while bombarding the director with notes as if the director was some dork who hadn’t already made a hit movie. This sucks the life and joy out of the film, and while it does well, it doesn’t do as well as the first.
3. Trying to recover the magic, and more important, the revenues of the first film, the original principals are each offered the gross domestic product of Finland as their up front money, fat back end deals, and a promise to not interfere. The third film is done just for the money, and has no real emotional investment by the principals, the audience catches onto that, and the movie tanks.
Hopefully Marvel doesn’t make that mistake now that it’s gone whole hog into the movie biz, and plays their cards right.
Comment by Furious D — June 11, 2008 @ 2:52 pm
Even if Favreau got offered a “higher fee than the first one,” it still could be a low-ball offer. The movie’s success, with both critics and audiences, was out of this world. Favreau should be getting a huge raise, but I’m guessing Marvel thinks they had more to do with the development than Favreau did, so he’s disposable.
Comment by b sols — June 11, 2008 @ 3:10 pm
The longer they take to ink Favreau’s deal while they have no script, writers or concept for the film and a firm April 2010 release date the more they set themselves up for disaster. I have heard that Universal may be going forward with a Fav Directed, Vince Vaughn film in the fall. I guess Marvel is about to lose its hit making director.
Comment by ear to the tracks — June 11, 2008 @ 3:52 pm
FURIOUS D,
I’m curious to know of one example of your formula, particularly with number 3. Name a third movie in any of these series that’s “tanked”. Taking Spider-Man 3, Pirates 3, Shrek 3 and X-Men 3 as recent examples, yes they were all the worst movies in the series, but they were also all incredibly successful.
I can’t think of one recent example that fits your formula. Other than that, it’s a sound formula.
Comment by Huh? — June 11, 2008 @ 4:49 pm
Give it a Break …Robert Downey Jr made this movie …any body could direct Robert.
IRONMAN IS DOWNEY
Marvel gave Favreau a break… and he is not that good.
Comment by J.Macky — June 11, 2008 @ 5:08 pm
Isn’t Favreau the guy who has said, “I don’t do sequels at any price?”
Comment by Hank Hollyweird — June 11, 2008 @ 5:16 pm
Let’s all just hope and pray that it’s a worthy offer and Jon gets signed. As awesome as Robert is, Iron Man success was largely due to the team effort between the two of them and I think the sequel will need Jon as much as it needs Robert to make it as good as the first. I, for one, will be highly upset if Jon doesn’t get attached to it and will definitely be writing some strongly worded letters.
Comment by Callista Maris — June 11, 2008 @ 5:42 pm
FURIOUS D - you are a moron. your theory makes no sense. there is not one trilogy in recent memory that follows your formula. have you ever been to a movie? get a life. and go back to Nebraska. Seriously.
Comment by d'oh! — June 11, 2008 @ 9:06 pm
“What, do people think Marvel is stupid?”
In a word - Yes.
Marvel’s actions highlight the difference between a real movie studio with a full slate of development and the pretend studio Marvel is trying to be with only comic properties to produce.
The BB/DK and X/X2 models that Jon outlined in his blog work because a real studio can take the time necessary to make the film right. Marvel has only a few properties that Kevin Feige and Marvel can develop.
Lesson - Movies are a Volume Business
Inside Hollywood Marvel topper Kevin Feige is famously known for not being “good with talent”. (Five weeks and no call back to your new Franchise Director? Way to go Kevin.)
Lesson - Relationships Matter.
This type of talk is usually a signal that The Studio/Marvel feels like they can take or leave Jon (and maybe Robert too) as the franchise moves forward. (Executive Idea of the Week - “Anyone can wear a metal suit!”)
Lesson - Anyone Can Ruin Anything.
Jon has enough experience to know this, the reason he made this a public issue, to complete his contract negotiations, leverage his influence while the Iron (Man) is hot.
Lesson - Learn From Experience
A real studio would have announced his sequel deal within a week of the film’s MASSIVE BOX OFFICE OPENING! WILD HOGS opened bigger than expected last spring and director Walt Becker’s sequel deal was announced within a week.
The Real Lesson here is that in Hollywood the only thing worse than them lying to you is when they stop calling you.
Comment by reelbusy — June 11, 2008 @ 10:49 pm
Maybe Favreau just started those internet rumors himself as a negotiating tactic to get more money.
Comment by AC — June 12, 2008 @ 12:29 am
Well, jon favreau posted on his website that he wasn’t talked to for five weeks after they announced that there would be an iron man 2 — so they are not rumors — it is just in bad form for marvel not to at least discuss it with favreau — it’s like a slap in the face.
Comment by jake — June 12, 2008 @ 12:30 am
Comment by Furious D — June 11, 2008 @ 2:52 pm
You took the words out of my mouth, literally!
Well said! Surprise no more.
Comment by Armand — June 12, 2008 @ 1:15 am
Huh, & D’oh took my little theory a little too harshly. It doesn’t affect all trilogies, I guess I should have said “Poorly managed” trilogies and explained better about how it is a trap to be carefully avoided. This is because many “3rd” movies may sell a lot of tickets, but end up costing so much, and losing that all important repeat ticket-buyer, they fail to make a real profit.
Rush Hour 3 is the classic template. The box-office numbers looked impressive, but count in the production budget, studio overhead, marketing, distribution, theater’s nut, the cut taken by foreign distributors (if it wasn’t already presold to cover overages)and the film’s gross loses it’s gloss. And while the ancillaries may one day cover that, they won’t be as golden as if the movie had been a major hit.
Many #3 movies require box-office sales nearing or exceeding a billion dollars just to break even. It’s part of the self-fulfilling idiocy that’s make Hollywood untenable as an industry.
And what’s with Nebraska? I’m not from there, but I’m saying that there isn’t anything wrong with being from there. I’m sure there are many nice Nebraskans out there.
And they say I’m the one who needs to get a life.
Sorry Nikki to take up your comment space like this, but some folks think name calling is discussion, so they have to learn how to discuss things all proper-like.
Comment by Furious D — June 12, 2008 @ 3:51 am
Dear D’Oh & Huh: While you were busy attacking Furious I guess you forgot about Rush Hour III. I don’t exactly blame you. I’d like to forget it too.
Comment by WawaLisa — June 12, 2008 @ 6:09 am
I have not seen his previous works so I cant say how Iron Man will depend on him. But I just hope everything works out and Iron Man 2 be amazing because I am definately watching that!
Comment by Real Iron Man costume — June 12, 2008 @ 7:22 am
Well let’s all hope that between the two of them, favreau and downey, they can leverage a better payday for both of them. I guarantee that they are talking to each other and will be watching each other’s backs during negotiations. Like others have said, the success came from both of them. This is their movie and the sequel should have their fingerprints on it as much as the first.
Marvel should show some class and compensate them according to their success. Iron Man put Marvel on the map and they owe it to these guys to make things right.
Comment by Johnny5 — June 12, 2008 @ 10:08 am
Unfortunately the final installment of most trilogies seem to make money so the studio is happy. But Spider-man and Pirates sucked horribly. I agree with the theory but the money still comes in out of hope and curiousity.
Comment by Twist — June 12, 2008 @ 10:36 am
RDJ and Favreau became very good friends and worked so well together. Their chemistry is a big part of the movie’s awesomeness. Marvel will be the most stupid studio in the history if they’ll hurt this combo.
Plus, their April 2010 date seems unrealistic now. If they want a good sequel, that is.
Comment by Ben — June 12, 2008 @ 12:37 pm
Favreau is well aware of the “3rd movie” issue and we discussed it in an interview. Unfortunately the timing for the Avengers movie won’t work out for it, but he thought that the third Iron Man movie should be a bridge to a full-blown Avengers film.
Vic
Comment by ScreenRant.com — June 12, 2008 @ 2:13 pm
Marvel has had a good run the past couple years, not long enough of a run that would make me decide if they are no longer stupid. So, yes, people still think marvel is stupid. I’ll wait to see how version/remake 3 of the Punisher turns out before deciding.
Comment by Erydan — June 13, 2008 @ 11:07 am
I’d like to second (or third or fourth) the notion that Furious D is a complete moron. Rush Hour 3 aside, the second installment of these “trilogies” is usually the most acclaimed of the series and grosses more than its predecessor (X-Men 2, Spiderman 2, Incredible Hulk).
In my experience, the sequel is always bigger, better, gets great reviews and completely outshines the predecessor. In comic books this usually happens because the first is what is referred to as an “origin story.” The everyday man/woman has something bizarre happen to them that gives them powers, they experiment with their powers and try to figure out wtf is going on, and in the third act they put on a silly costume and kick some a$$. The real meat always comes the second time around.
Despite the fact that you clearly know nothing about the industry, you’re half right about the third installment. Generally it’s done completely for money. Sometimes there’s a talent change that creates a lot of controversey (coughratnercough). But by the time the third film comes along, the cast and crew are completely uninspired and generally it’s done to please the shareholders.
Comment by Matty — June 15, 2008 @ 4:01 pm
Oh and to Erydan. We’re talking about Marvel Studios here. The Punisher has absolutely nothing to do with their production house. Neither does X-Men, Spiderman, Ghost Rider, etc. They no longer own the movie rights to those properties. If the new Punisher is any good (and I’ll be shocked if it is), Lionsgate will benefit from its success.
Comment by Matty — June 15, 2008 @ 4:03 pm
First off, Jon’s not only one of the more stand-up guys in Hollywood, he’s a meticulous craftsman who cares about what he does. I think he knows more than anyone how much collective work went into making Iron Man as good as it was- hence the understandable concern that Marvel would announce a release date that might be not be possible to meet, without first consulting any of the people responsible for actually delivering the film. Let’s not forget that besides being a blockbuster hit, Iron Man represents a couple of years out of the guy’s life, so he ought to be forgiven for being emotionally invested in the sequel being good, whether he’s called upon to direct it or not. Which of course he wanted to be.
Second, if a couple of thousand people deluged me for five weeks about the Big Party, and what I’m gonna wear, who I’m bringing, what time I’m going to get there, I don’t think I’d be an asshole in to say, “You know, um… I’m not sure, I haven’t actually been invited, yet.” Which is pretty much what everyone is jumping all over him for doing.
Did he get lucky with Iron Man? Of course he did. He was lucky with Swingers, he was extremely lucky with Elf, and he was eleventh highest all time lucky with Iron Man. How many lucky home runs does a guy have to hit before he’s a hitter? Did he do it alone? Of course not. Was he supposed to? Robert Downey Jr. is brilliant. Jeff Bridges and Gwynneth Paltrow are brilliant. That’s why he cast them, fought for them, and then turned them loose to be brilliant in the movie, as good directors do.
Comic book movies are incredibly tricky to pull off. You have a hard-core fan base of purists who are protective of the title. Like, Vatican protective. You have to tell them a story they already know like the back of their action figure in a way that surprises them at every turn. You also have a general audience who’s never heard of the character before- you have to start them from zero and bring them up to speed without losing them in insider shorthand or bogging down the film with exposition. You have to make two-dimensional pen and ink characters work in three-dimensional flesh and blood. You have to translate a vision that was created for the 1970’s and make it feel cutting-edge and relevant today (again, without angering the purists). You have to take 40 years of storyline and compress it into an hour and a half with three acts and it’s own closure, but without painting the franchise into a corner, and you have to do it all with a ton of CGI that you never get to see until long after the movie is shot. That’s pretty hard, all in all. Ang Lee’s one of the best director’s in the world, and I don’t think he pulled it off.
I certainly don’t know how anybody can look at the movie, the reviews, the box office, the fan feedback, or Marvel’s stock price the next Monday and say Favreau didn’t do a terrific job. In the course one weekend, everybody went from thinking Marvel was a company with maybe four or five franchise titles, to thinking the sky’s the limit for the whole catalog.
Comment by Anonymous — July 10, 2008 @ 5:48 pm