from IGN:

"Favreau Not Directing Iron Man 3
UPDATED: The search is on for a new filmmaker.
December 14, 2010


by Eric Goldman
The search has begun for a new director to take on Tony Stark's cinematic adventures, as Vulture reports that Jon Favreau will not be returning to direct Iron Man 3.

Favreau informed Marvel Studios of his decision this week, though Vulture says it's unclear whether his decision was financial, creative or both. Vulture cites an informed source as saying Favreau was frustrated with Marvel wanting to include more and more of their characters into the Iron Man series, especially in the wake of Iron Man's role in The Avengers.

However, Vulture says Favreau may have simply been too expensive for Marvel at this point, as they and their parent company, Disney, look to find ways to cut costs – noting that Favreau is said to have made $10 million for Iron Man 2 and would almost certainly get another sizable raise for Iron Man 3 to as much as $15 million, along with receiving 15 percent of the film's gross after it recouped costs. In fact, Vulture says that one of their sources familiar with "Marvel's playbook" theorizes that the company, "had been pushing a confusing and packed vision of the third film as a tactic to provoke Favreau into leaving the project."

According to Vulture, Marvel began quietly searching for a new director as of last night. However, they note whoever is picked will have to be okayed by Robert Downey Jr., who has contractual approval over the director of the film.

Favreau may not be making Iron Man 3 for Disney (which purchased distribution rights for Avengers and IM3 back from Paramount recently), but he will still be working for the company – as he prepares to direct the Disneyland inspired Magic Kingdom, after completing work on Cowboys & Aliens.

In the meantime, Downey Jr. will get back in the Iron Man armor when he films The Avengers for director Joss Whedon next year, for a 2012 release date. Iron Man 3 is scheduled to be released May 3, 2013.

Now here's the big question: Will Favreau still appear in Iron Man 3 as Happy Hogan?

UPDATE: Both a Marvel source as well as Jon Favreau himself have confirmed the news. Favreau tweeted, "It's true, I'm directing Magic Kingdom, not Iron Man 3. I've had a great run with Marvel and wish them the best.""

GamerTag and PSN: PokeEmAll

http://herocomplex.latimes.com/2010/12/14/jon-favreau-explains-why-he-traded-iron-man-3-for-disneyland-trip/

Jon Favreau explains why he traded ‘Iron Man 3′ for Disneyland trip
Dec. 14, 2010 | 6:23 p.m.
EXCLUSIVE

Jon Favreau said Tuesday that he is walking away from the billion-dollar ”Iron Man” franchise and will join filmmakers Guillermo del Toro and David Fincher as part of a next wave of filmmakers making major live-action feature films rooted in the imagery of Disney theme park attractions and classic characters.

Favreau is set to direct “Magic Kingdom,” which the 44-year-old filmmaker described as a family fantasy adventure that will tap into the vintage Disney imagery that “loomed so large in the imagination” of his generation. Favreau said that Fincher (expected by many to be a strong Oscar contender for “The Social Network“) will direct the studio’s ”20,000 Leagues Under the Sea,” a Jules Verne bookshelf classic that is closely associated with Disney after the landmark 1954 film and the submarine theme-park ride, and Del Toro has already been announced as director of a new “Haunted Mansion” film.

Favreau spoke in reverent terms of the legacy of Walt Disney and made it clear that his departure from Marvel is no snap decision or the result of fractured relations. The main impulse was to “find something that lights a fire” inside of him as a filmmaker and gives him a chance to “blow people away, which is easier to do with a project that isn’t loaded with built-in expectations.” He also said he has been researching the film for many weeks even as he works in post-production on “Cowboys & Aliens,” the genre mash-up that hits theaters next summer.


Jon Favreau and Robert Downey Jr. on set of "Iron Man 2" (Marvel Entertainment)

“Between the theme parks and the movies, the Disney iconography was probably the first set of archetypes that I was exposed to,” Favreau said of his youth in Flushing, N.Y. “Walt was able to expose me as a child to the full array of emotions, including fear and sorrow. Those movies and attractions haunted my dreams and made a deep impression on me as a child. When I first heard about the project, I was on my way to visit Disneyland with my family. I took notes and had no problem filling a book with all the ideas that this concept offered, even on first blush. Since then, I was lucky enough to be given a tour of Imagineering by Tony Baxter, who knows just about everything there is to know about Disneyland. He pulled original concept art from the archives for me and exposed me to Walt’s original vision.”


Walt Disney (Los Angeles Times archives)

Favreau walks away from the “Iron Man” franchise that pulled in $1.2 billion in worldwide grosses, raised the career of Robert Downey Jr. to a whole new strata and established upstart Marvel Studios as a serious player in the blockbuster business. In some corners of the Internet, the rumor of Favreau’s departure has been framed as a money issue or a conflict regarding Marvel’s aspiration to have all its superhero films crossover into one another. On Tuesday, though, Favreau said that he remains close to Marvel Studios President Kevin Feige (the executive has even been an informal sounding board for the filmmaker’s “Magic Kingdom” ideas) and that he will stay on as a producer on ”The Avengers,” Marvel’s 2012 superhero team-up film.

Feige could not be reached for comment for this story. While declining to make any specific comment, a Disney spokesman confirmed that Fincher and Favreau are indeed working on “Magic Kingdom” and “20,000 Leagues,” respectively. Marvel’s parent, Marvel Entertainment, was purchased by Disney and it will be interesting to see if the smaller studio becomes a proving ground that leads to more deeply funded Disney proper. It’s telling that Favreau described his departure from Marvel more like a graduation than a divorce.

“Marvel and I both came of age together,” Favreau said. “The years that we shared were a pivotal experience. Kevin has a firm grasp on the many franchises and how they all interweave and I am happy that I had the opportunity to establish the world that these characters can now play in…. ‘Iron Man’ has given me tremendous opportunities and Kevin and I are enjoying a lot of momentum in our careers thanks to the ‘Iron Man’ films. I look forward to seeing what others can do playing in the same world.”

Favreau said he was eager for the challenge of “Magic Kingdom” and candidly added that part of that challenge will be separating the film from movies such “Night at the Museum” or “Who Framed Roger Rabbit,” which have a similar concept at their foundation — presenting a new adventure with a gallery of iconic personas as supporting characters. (The film also will have to take a step or two away from Epic Mickey, the high-profile video game that just hit stores and presents a quest that plays out across a dark alternate counterpart version of Disneyland.)

“It can’t just be like the Christmas parade with all the Disney characters going by,” Favreau said. Speaking of holiday fare, Favreau also said he wants to connect with the smart but family-friendly spirit of “Elf,” his 2003 holiday film with Will Ferrell that grossed $220 million worldwide (and cost less than $35 million to make) and has grown in stature on home video and television reruns.

“I can’t begin to tell you how fulfilling the perennial nature of ‘Elf’ on television has been for me,” Favreau said. “It’s great to be able to connect parents with children both emotionally and through humor. I look forward to exploring family entertainment once again and examining the specifics of our day-to-day lives against the backdrop of an extraordinary adventure.”

– Geoff Boucher

"you can go ahead and sneeze, cuz my presence blessed you"

http://tvrecappersanonymous.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/shark-jump.jpg

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

A few years removed from it and I think it might be the best super hero flick yet.

it has some iconic and wonderful scenes but it's not a good movie.

Yeah, it's dated in a lot of ways and the whole turning back time shit was the huffness... But I think the movie is still good.

(Of course, I am saying this having last watched it in 1996 or so...)

________________

"Do you know what a nerd is? A nerd is a human being without enough Africa in him or her." © Brian Eno, "A Year With Swollen Appendices"

superman 2, on the other hand, is AWFUL.

>superman 2, on the other hand, is AWFUL.

*touches shock's forehead with back of hand*

You sure you okay, man?

________________

"Do you know what a nerd is? A nerd is a human being without enough Africa in him or her." © Brian Eno, "A Year With Swollen Appendices"

since when do superman's powers include throwing a transparent S-shield off his chest to shrinkwrap villains?

KNEEL BEFORE SHOCK.

will put the movie in a completely different light for you

<------ i wish they all can be california boho girls

http://www.rareformnyc.com
http://www.myspace.com/djshinobishaw
http://www.last.fm/user/ShinoShaw
http://twitter.com/DJShinobiShaw
PSN: ShinobiShaw

"Arm Leg Leg Arm How you doin?" (c) T510

Now, Superman II does move at the speed of molasses, but I couldn't call the first slow at all.

And how "ordinary" is a film about an humanoid alien with powers beyond the boundaries of mortal men? Both today AND in 1978?

and i don't know what kind of movies YOU watch..

And why complain when they're matched with that awesome John Williams theme.

An as far as what types of movies I watch, all (well most) kinds. Not just ones made in the last few years. "Gone with the Wind" moves slow. "Superman: The Movie" does not.

absolutely.



it's also exactly the same as his stars wars score but who's counting?

That, and I can name a GRIP of noted composers whose works for various films sounds more alike than it should - some of whom who've won whole trophycases of Oscars for music.

So who cares? The Superman music works for Superman.

is that bullsht gag with the pimp on the corner when Supes changes for the first time.

Other than that, it holds up pretty well today.

>is that bullsht gag with the pimp on the corner when Supes
>changes for the first time.
>
>Other than that, it holds up pretty well today.

"Yo dude, that's a bad outFIT!!"

I bought that "Ultimate Superman Collection" when it dropped, so I have all of the Superman films.

No, it's not a perfect film (it's hard to make a perfect comic book movie), but it captures the essence and world of the comic books so perfectly that the good far outweighs the bad (which is primarily how cartoony Lex Luthor is in that film).

"Batman" (1989) is also an excellent comic book movie, and I suppose "300" counts as well.

______________________________________________________________________________

"There's a fine line between persistence and foolishness..."
-unknown

"To Each His Reach"
-George Clinton

comic book movie

________________________________

(屮ﾟДﾟ )屮

I wonder if what the studios wanted was a bad turn and he didn't want part of it or he just said eff' it and left. Either way dude man two fun movies one of which was one of the best new Milena era Superhero flicks made.

wonder if he got the Richard Donner treatment?

sometimes u gotta leave ur inner nigger in the bank vault. - desus

Situation Podemy : www.situationpodemy.wordpress.com
itunes:https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/situation-podemy/id620232249
facebook: facebook.com/situationpodemy
@SituationPodemy

I suspect not.

Iron Man and Incredible Hulk, Marvel/Disney are really trying their best to not be awesome.

------------------------------

17x NBA Champions

*sigh*
_________________________________
Reunion Radio Podcasts
Bringing Together Five Decades of R&B/Funk/Soul/Dance

http://reunionradio.blogspot.com/

Latest episode- Silky1's Unsung Tribute (Parts 1, 2 & 3)

-Sig-

“Why didn’t you do this in your own god damn country?"

-All Stah's view on undocumented immigrants wanting to be treated like human beings.

-Sig-

“Why didn’t you do this in your own god damn country?"

-All Stah's view on undocumented immigrants wanting to be treated like human beings.

movie sucked.

plenty of people loved it
some people didn't care for it at all
it was critically well received by pros and joes alike

i will say he's certainly entitled to his opinion, as are you, because lets face it- the populace can and does get it wrong often enough, and i'm not one who really cares about that anyways.

-Sig-

“Why didn’t you do this in your own god damn country?"

-All Stah's view on undocumented immigrants wanting to be treated like human beings.

like, "margin of error" slight.

I've said for the last two years that they're both heavily flawed, only in different ways.

give it a B+

-Sig-

“Why didn’t you do this in your own god damn country?"

-All Stah's view on undocumented immigrants wanting to be treated like human beings.

...says Wrongthink

Real talk: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12JJv6yCk7Q

Current Rotation:

Shad - TSOL
Onra - Long Distance
Cool Kids - Tacklebox
Shabazz Palaces

but if you want to use that barometer, fine
just don't limit that response to the relatively limited pool of RT

-Sig-

“Why didn’t you do this in your own god damn country?"

-All Stah's view on undocumented immigrants wanting to be treated like human beings.

Like really. One is a top tier comic book movie of all time; the other, at best, is a middling attempt at one.

There's nothing memorable about Incredible Hulk, and I don't know anyone who's seen it more than once. Iron Man, on the other hand, is a candidate for GOAT comic book film.

------------------------------

17x NBA Champions

middling probably puts it in the top 25, lol.

also the final battle was memorable. not to mention I still don't understand the criticism of it really. What exactly did people want to see going in? Not to say that it meeting expectations automatically makes it a good film, but the criticisms are strange to me. People want Hulk Smash. '03 Hulk didn't deliver, '08 Hulk did.

>
>middling probably puts it in the top 25, lol.
>
>also the final battle was memorable.
it was memorable for involving two very poorly designed cartoon characters slugging it out.


not to mention I still
>don't understand the criticism of it really. What exactly did
>people want to see going in?
Um, a good movie?

Not to say that it meeting
>expectations automatically makes it a good film, but the
>criticisms are strange to me. People want Hulk Smash. '03 Hulk
>didn't deliver, '08 Hulk did.
The problem with '08 Hulk is that all they focused on was "Hulk Smash", and they didn't even get much of that right (see also, that unconvincing looking fight on the green). The talent of Ed Norton was almost completely wasted on such a vapid film.

and the CGI was awful, as was the effects of having the monsters voices be multitracked like a bad Saturday morning cartoon.

It was too light, while, in contrast, the first Hulk (Ang Lee's) had too much story, was far too long, and only had a few short action sequences. And while the texturing and compositing lacked seriously in Lee's Hulk, the actual character animation (and model) were a bit more convincing. I was in the theater _appalled_ at how rushed and subpar the CGI in the '08 Hulk was when I first saw it.

i cringe everytime someone says that nonsense
because there wasn't "too much story"
the story just blew liquid out it's rear end

and hulk 08 looked HULK
that dude looked beastly
funny you call 08 two cartoons fighting when brokeback's version was far more cartoonish. it looked like banner just got ahold of jim carreys Mask instead of hulking out

the action and the context of the action itself plays up the hulk being HULK better in the second

and he just flat out looks better tall, lean, and ripped like he's been on p90ex and steroids. evem in teh comics i never liked the roundish, chubby hulk from the old days

-Sig-

“Why didn’t you do this in your own god damn country?"

-All Stah's view on undocumented immigrants wanting to be treated like human beings.

>i cringe everytime someone says that nonsense
>because there wasn't "too much story"
>the story just blew liquid out it's rear end

No, there was indeed too much story, specifically too much backstory. They tried to compress damn near all 40 years of psychologically-based Hulk comics into about 40% of the runtime of the film. Made the film very, very dense and over long.

>
>and hulk 08 looked HULK
>that dude looked beastly
>funny you call 08 two cartoons fighting when brokeback's
>version was far more cartoonish. it looked like banner just
>got ahold of jim carreys Mask instead of hulking out

I hope calling Ang Lee "Brokeback" was not meant to be an insult. That's some fifth grade bullshit.

And no, the '08 Hulk did not look that good. THr '03 Hulk might have been Technicolor green, but that's the color the character is in the books, so that's what they went with. Other people had a problem with it, so for the second I guess they thought they could dress up poor quality animation by over texturing it.

But the actual animation/motion catpure/whatever the fuck in the first film was far, far better than in the second, where I'm watching shoulders improperly deform and obviously low poly models swapped in and out between shots. The worst were the transformation scenes, which were wretched-looking. The '08 Hulk, didn't look like he could convincingly co-exist in the world with the rest of the characters, more by poor, weightless animation from Rhythm and Hues (versus ILM, who did the first film) than the design.

>
>the action and the context of the action itself plays up the
>hulk being HULK better in the second

Doesn't make up enough fo the rest.

>
>and he just flat out looks better tall, lean, and ripped like
>he's been on p90ex and steroids. evem in teh comics i never
>liked the roundish, chubby hulk from the old days

First of all, only a dumbass goes on p90x and steroids at the same fucking time. Second of all, the design doesn't mean shit if it's not utilized properly and if the head on the thing isn't designed properly (which I don't think it was). Third of all, the '03 Hulk was taller (MUCH taller) than the '08 one. Fourth of all, why are you throwing Jack Kirby under the bus like that?

in the picture, and most, if not all of them, are in the trailer.

>No, there was indeed too much story, specifically too much
>backstory. They tried to compress damn near all 40 years of
>psychologically-based Hulk comics into about 40% of the
>runtime of the film. Made the film very, very dense and over
>long.

either way... the story was boring.

>I hope calling Ang Lee "Brokeback" was not meant to be an
>insult. That's some fifth grade bullshit.

clearly you took it as an insult, so it is what it is at this point.
ang lee did brokeback mouintain, right? i don't know any other ang lee movies to refference. people are way too caught up in this being an ang lee film. ang lee, ang lee, ang lee. put michael bays name on the exact same movie and you'd get an entirely different response for that steaming mess for the ang lee fanboys.

>And no, the '08 Hulk did not look that good.

yeah he did, so we'll agree to disagre on that. he looked great actually.

>might have been Technicolor green, but that's the color the
>character is in the books, so that's what they went with.

this is where the "stay faithful to the source material" types lose me. just because it was in the original medium, doesn't mean it translates well into a movie. giving me a legit reason why something was done the way it was done does not make that thing any good. it's still awful. next your gonna tell me the hulk dogs were a great idea because the comic had them.


>Other people had a problem with it, so for the second I guess
>they thought they could dress up poor quality animation by
>over texturing it.

it was a completely different creature. sue them for actually putting some detail and definition on this one.

>But the actual animation/motion catpure/whatever the fuck in
>the first film was far, far better than in the second, where
>I'm watching shoulders improperly deform and obviously low
>poly models swapped in and out between shots.

this is where your super animation know it all thing gets in yoru way:

how would you know what a proper shoulder deformation during a hulk transformation looks like?

how many of these have you seen in the real world?


The worst were
>the transformation scenes, which were wretched-looking. The
>'08 Hulk, didn't look like he could convincingly co-exist in
>the world with the rest of the characters, more by poor,
>weightless animation from Rhythm and Hues (versus ILM, who did
>the first film) than the design.

...and you really think that day glow green shrek monster looked like hhe really lived in that world? really? that mess was a half degree off of roger rabbit status.


>First of all, only a dumbass goes on p90x and steroids at the
>same fucking time.

first of all, dummy, only an idiot would make the hulked out leap from a blatantly obvious over the top description of a character in a movie to equating it to a real world action. i'm not talking about real people you dolt. i wasn't even making a suggestion of such a thing. it was basically saying he was freakishly ripped as the hulk should look, as if he went on p90ex and took steroids at the same time. take some prozac or something.

>if it's not utilized properly and if the head on the thing
>isn't designed properly (which I don't think it was). Third of
>all, the '03 Hulk was taller (MUCH taller) than the '08 one.

yes, and they decided to keep him a little more in line with the real world by making him 9 feet tall. the idea was to make him freakishly huge but try and keep some semblance of real world scale. so i dunno what you mean by "designed properly" and using this stupid comparison with the first one. wtf does 03 being taller have to do with anything? they created their own design with their own vision, who the hell are you to say they didn't design him properly?

>Fourth of all, why are you throwing Jack Kirby under the bus
>like that?

throw him under the buss? whats with you and the hyperbole today? lets not get carried away, mr misty eyes.

saying i'm not a fan of the og retard frankenstein styled design is throwing him under the buss now? is there some law stating that i have to like it? or one saying i am not allowed to say it if i don't? saying that's not really a good look for a movie version of that character is throwing him under the bus now? how is that throwing him under the bus?

did i somehow make him the scapegoat for something?
did i set him up for failure somehow?
did i put him in a position to lose every penny he's earned from it?
did i set fire to a wearhouse full of his original panels?

did i do anything even resembling "throwing jack kirby under a bus?
no?

-Sig-

“Why didn’t you do this in your own god damn country?"

-All Stah's view on undocumented immigrants wanting to be treated like human beings.

(and miss me with the "you just don't have a response" - I have plenty of things to say, but knowledgeable discourse seems lost on you)

Otherwise, I've better things to do.

-Sig-

“Why didn’t you do this in your own god damn country?"

-All Stah's view on undocumented immigrants wanting to be treated like human beings.

If we're on that, the negatively connotated "Brokeback" comment came first, to which I wasn't trying to play "victim" (because my name isn't Ang Lee), only pointing out how immature it is to call dude 'Brokeback" in a disparaging manner, as if him directing that picture was a bad thing in any for or fashion.

And even if I _had_ taken personal offense to it, where does the "stop being a victim" nonsense stop? Am I allowed to run up on white folks or Latinos and spew racial epithets, run u on Christians and tell anti-Jesus jokes, etc, and then flip the script on them when they complain? It's not too hard to learn to communicate in a civil, adult manner, especially when discussing shit as trivial as comic book movies.

you popped things off with your comment on the p90ex thing
spare me the third grade comment because you got all juvenile about something you know good and well was merely descriptive language of the appearance of hulk.

>If we're on that, the negatively connotated "Brokeback"
>comment came first, to which I wasn't trying to play "victim"
>(because my name isn't Ang Lee), only pointing out how
>immature it is to call dude 'Brokeback" in a disparaging
>manner, as if him directing that picture was a bad thing in
>any for or fashion.

it wasn't disparaging, only wisecracking,, you simply took offense to that wisecrack and asumed an agenda that wasn't there. it's no different from the way you initially read into the boyz in the hood thread yesterday. you can either accept that i meant no malice or not, but that's your choice.

>Am I allowed to run
>up on white folks or Latinos and spew racial epithets,

smh. did i call you a bunch of names? i called ang lee brokeback because- NEWSFLASH- he directed the movie. i didn't call you brokeback. i didn't insult you.

at worst, it was an insensitive quip of zero consequence on my part.
you've made much more of it then there was. for what it's worth, i apologize because it absolutely wasn't meant to be taken as an ephitet.

-Sig-

“Why didn’t you do this in your own god damn country?"

-All Stah's view on undocumented immigrants wanting to be treated like human beings.

real talk. this is the single reason i brought a blu ray player back in 08 when the shits were still expensive.

- u already know

I mean I know you want to sell more action figures, but if it ain't broke don't fix it.

It's just weird to me to higher all these solid directors as if they are focused on quality, and then start mucking around with the process. Might as well just find some dude transitioning from music videos who will be the studio's bitch.

Actually, I think the problem is that they're trying to stuff more good guys in it, not villains.

That was my problem with Iron Man 2. They were so busy trying to tie everything into the fucking Avengers instead of letting Iron Man get his own shine on.

It looks like they wanted to not only continue that, but amp it up even more.

we never saw and the Avengers movie that's on its way