I remember hearing awhile ago that Favreau is a comic book fan. Which is probably one reason why he did such a good job on Iron Man. He understands the genre. And judging by the mess Yates has made of Harry Potter, you absolutely need someone in the directors chair that understands the genre of the movie being made.
I feel like this could be more about Favreau directing ‘Magic Kingdom’ – maybe the timing just conflicts? I’m sure Marvel has their big ol’ plan as to when they want all of their movies coming out. It’s a foolish choice, of course, but I can’t imagine it’s necessarily a money thing.
I chalk up IM2’s “failure” to Marvel’s insistence that it be some kind of invisible prequel to The Avengers.
I think Favreau’s creative direction was imperative to the success of the original and for launching Marvel’s second wave of box office domination. Without him, the suit would have been 100% CGI and Robert Downey Jr. wouldn’t have been cast as Tony Stark. Believe it.
Well, under those conditions, maybe the Ironman franchise doesn’t deserve Favreau anymore… IM1 was spectacular, IM2, not so much. I still enjoyed the sequel, mind you, but at this point, I’d be afraid of what would happen to IM3 if everything stayed the same.
If the split wasn’t on good terms (and it doesn’t sound like it) then I will be sad about the lack of Happy (both as a director and character.)
My thought? He’s so money, and they don’t even know it.
Ugh… Pay the man what he wants and let him do what he wants. He knows what he’s doing it.
I remember hearing awhile ago that Favreau is a comic book fan. Which is probably one reason why he did such a good job on Iron Man. He understands the genre. And judging by the mess Yates has made of Harry Potter, you absolutely need someone in the directors chair that understands the genre of the movie being made.
I feel like this could be more about Favreau directing ‘Magic Kingdom’ – maybe the timing just conflicts? I’m sure Marvel has their big ol’ plan as to when they want all of their movies coming out. It’s a foolish choice, of course, but I can’t imagine it’s necessarily a money thing.
Considering how pale the sequel was compared to the first one, would it really be that big of a deal if Favreau doesn’t direct the 3rd one?
I chalk up IM2’s “failure” to Marvel’s insistence that it be some kind of invisible prequel to The Avengers.
I think Favreau’s creative direction was imperative to the success of the original and for launching Marvel’s second wave of box office domination. Without him, the suit would have been 100% CGI and Robert Downey Jr. wouldn’t have been cast as Tony Stark. Believe it.
Well, under those conditions, maybe the Ironman franchise doesn’t deserve Favreau anymore… IM1 was spectacular, IM2, not so much. I still enjoyed the sequel, mind you, but at this point, I’d be afraid of what would happen to IM3 if everything stayed the same.