Terrence Howard Doesn't Know Why Iron Man Dumped Him
Filed under: Action, Casting, RumorMonger, Celebrities and Controversy, Comic/Superhero/Geek, Remakes and Sequels
If there was one story last week that prompted geekdom to wail aloud and gnash their teeth, it was the news that Terrence Howard wouldn't be returning as Rhodes in Iron Man 2. The role (and future War Machine suit) will go to Don Cheadle. It isn't that Cheadle won't do a fine job, but Howard was the perfect Rhodey. And that great little "Next time!" scene? It loses a bit of fun when a different person pops up next time. We all blamed Howard for the split, particularly because the trades implied he wanted too much money to return. But we're in for another round of "Who do you believe?" because Howard told NPR that he knows nothing about any contract negotiations. In fact, he learned the ugly truth of his departure at the same time and place as the rest of us -- the trades. "It was the surprise of a lifetime. There was no explanation. [The contract] just ... up and vanished. I read something in the trades implicating that it was about money or something, but apparently the contracts that we write and sign aren't worth the paper that they're printed on, sometimes. Promises aren't kept, and good faith negotiations aren't always held up."
Now, this could be all damage control on Howard's part (and you can listen to the entire interview to judge for yourself), but it's a startling state of affairs nonetheless. And who likes the implication that no one bothered to tell Howard "You're fired!" That's just not cool. I don't like all this drama surrounding Iron Man 2 -- first, Favreau was on the outs, now it's Howard. If I wake up tomorrow and find out Robert Downey Jr. has been replaced with Clive Owen (which, like Cheadle, would be a choice of equal caliber but just not the same), I'll know there's no hope for Hollywood.
[via CHUD]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
10-20-2008 @ 10:51AM
tyler said...
I can't believe this news. I mean it is what it is. It doesn't really matter what happened only that Howard won't be back for the second which is ridiculous. Howard and Cheadle are about the same caliber actors. But Downey Jr. is far superior to Clive Owen. Clive owen tends to always seem like... clive owen. And Downey jr. escapes into his roles... at least this is what it seems to me
Reply
10-20-2008 @ 11:06AM
Riley Freeman said...
i agree with above poster. clive owen is good and all. but he has one emotion and its distant and cold. shoot em up and sin city were eprfect for him. that movie with jennifer anniston. i kept waying for him to start shooting stuff and become bad ass. i cannot see him as a family man and he better never get cast as one again.
if this is true that they jsut replaced him without tellign terrance then that is terrible and i wont not watch iron man but i wont encourage people to see number 2
Reply
10-20-2008 @ 11:32AM
eugene said...
Boo! Bring back Terrence Howard. The don cheadle move doesn't even make sense, the two actors have completely different on screen presence. If they're going to jump horses, they should have at least found an actor that would have left the chemistry between the characters of tony stark and rhodes the same.
Reply
10-20-2008 @ 11:53AM
totoro said...
Loved Howard in Hustle and Flow, but thought he was wasted in Iron Man.
Reply
10-20-2008 @ 12:11PM
Sam said...
I definitely didn't understand why Howard was chosen for Iron Man. I actually thought that Cheadle would have been a better choice for the part, but Howard was nonetheless Rhodey in the original, and I hate it when companies switch actors outside of a reboot. Next thing we're going to be hearing that Jake Gyllenhaal is the new Joker.
On a side note I would not say that Clive Owen and Downey Jr. are equal caliber but that's just because I think Downey is one of the greatest actors of his generation. Owen has been awesome in everything he's done and has shown incredible diversity between Shoot 'Em Up, Children of Men, Closer, and Sin City.
Reply
10-20-2008 @ 12:46PM
AJ Wiley said...
Yeah, all of the drama surrounding Iron Man 2 kind of concerns me.
Reply
10-21-2008 @ 3:05PM
June said...
Don Cheadle is just not hot enough. Marvel has the money. Didn’t we pay them enough at the box office for the first movie?!? Not another dime from me. . . I’m buying Iron Man 2 bootleg and mailing out copies. . . I’m banning this crap. Bring back Terrence Howard. I hope it tanks since Marvel doesn't appreciate its Iron Man fans enough to live up to our expectations by not switching up main characters. DOWN WITH IRON MAN II!!!
Reply
10-21-2008 @ 7:26PM
Deathbot said...
Maybe I'm just a conspiracy theory nut and Cheadle is more of a high profile actor, but come on don't try to convince me that this was over paychecks. They're not going to pay Don Cheadle less than Terrance Howard. They are probably trying to bring more weight to the project. I get it! But, comic book fans are big on continuity (especially when there's nothing wrong with the first choice). If they are doing a full reboot (Hulk, Batman, Superman, Star Trek etc.) I am not expecting the original actors to show up, but when you make a sequel on the heels of the last one and the actors, their performance and their relationship to the other actors is already established and ingrained on the viewers memory, you owe it to the audience to maintain that actor in that role.
That's why it bothered me when they switched Maggie Gyllenhaal for Katie Holmes. It bothered me when they switched Maria Bello for Rachel Wiesz in Mummy 3. Heck, it bothered me when they switched Kirstie Alley for Robin Curtis in the old Star Trek movies.
Now, I am less irked by a switch like Taylor Mane for Liev Shreiber in Wolverine because, let's face it, Victor Creed has to be seen as a man before he turns into the beast known as Sabretooth and enough time has passed since the first X-Men movie that this is more than acceptable.
This is my final word on the matter. Studios... stop switching actors for political reasons. Stick with them. Pay them the extra million and get on with it the job of making it fun for us... the viewers.
Reply
11-11-2008 @ 11:37AM
Sam said...
I agree with you all the way! I hope Favreau and Theroux(the directors)can bring Terrence back if its not too late, which we think it is. Both of their egos must be so big that they think this doesn't matter: our blogs, etc. They are already going into bad publicity mode even before pre-production begins on the sequel. Even Robert Downey Jr. hinted at somewhat of a slight displeasure as well with Terrence's departure. Cheadle, for the first time in his career, is now receiving more public scrutiny than what he bargained for. It's unfortunate!
10-21-2008 @ 9:52PM
paul said...
Something is rotten in the state of Hollywood.
Reply
10-25-2008 @ 10:14AM
criss said...
Why do they want to go and ruin everything over a measly few million, when Iron Man 1 clearly slammed it at the box office?
And Clive Owen instead of RDJ? Only if they wanted to bore me to tears. In fact, he usually looks pretty bored himself. No range whatsoever.
Reply
11-02-2008 @ 5:53PM
andy said...
Well,apparently as incredible as it may seemed,the behind
the scenes story is that Howard was overpaid for the first
one(yes,he got paid even more than Robert!) and that the director didn't like him very much and wanted to reduce
his salary since he wouldn't be used so much in iron
man 2.
Moviegoers menacing to boycott a movie because of
storyline or casting has hardly ever worked.
Pierce brosnan fans said they'd boycott Casino royale
because they didn't like Daniel craig.
The result was the most popular bond movie ever!
Trek fans said they'd boycott the 2nd trek film if
they killed Spock!The movie still was a big hit
at the box office.
I thought that Howard was fine and should have
came back and i disagree with Don replacing
him since he doesn't look like the superhero
type but it's better for all superhero fans that
iron man keeps bringing box office gold so
that all the other super heroes films get
made as soon as possible instead of the
studio stopping everything(including the avengers
film that will also feature iron man)for a year
or two trying to figure out why their latest super
hero film didn't do good business at the box
office.
Reply
11-03-2008 @ 7:43PM
Barbara said...
Hard to tell what the truth is in LaLa land, I enjoyed Ironman and would love to see the next ones, but the outside drama should be saved for the screen. Terrence Howard is a terrific actor and I always enjoy him. I wish that at least someone would talk straight and say, sorry but things did not work out and we had to make a change. All the speculation about why looks bad for everyone involved.
Reply
11-11-2008 @ 12:11PM
Sam said...
There have been many major entertainment blogs(msn, yahoo, Comming Soon, USA Today, BET, etc..) and several online petitions in support of Terrence for continuity within the Ironman franchise. Many bloggers like myself, have supported Terrence and think the continuity of the Ironman franchise has now been tarnished after a great start with the first film. Casting and recasting in superhero movies are always controversial, but I have not seen an uproar and displeasure with a recasting like this one for Ironman 2/Avengers. Favreau, Theroux and Marvel are "not using sound judgement at this point in the preplanning stages".
Several theroies support this "blame game." If Terrence was to be replaced, why didn't they choose an actor who resemblemed Terrence more. You cannot fool the public because there will be an "instant" on screen difference between Don and Terrence. Don is more reminscent of a Wesley Snipes or a Isaiah Washington. Terrence resembles Gary Dourdain and Micheal Early:TWO ACTORS WHO WOULD HAVE BEEN A BETTER FIT"VISUALLY" FOR FRANCHISE CONTINUITY!!**The same visual thought process should have been used for Ironman 2 like the David Banner/Hulk character recasting AND for the James Bond movies. At least Daniel Craig looked suave and could kick some ass at the same time!
There also appears to be some corporate shadiness behind the scenes as well because Marvel and the directors are not releasing valid statements in their defense to the decisions that have been made. Although Don has great talent, he does not possess that on-screen swagger like Terrence. Several female bloggers said they would rather see Terrence on screen because he looks more desirable(As we all know, this trait makes a actor/actress a superstar in Hollywood, despite their given talent these days!!) Plus, in a fairytale world, ladies would rather be heroically saved by Terrence than Don;even covered in a metal suit. Few bloggers have said that its not that serious because Don is a great actor, but it is seriuos because their would not be so many current headlines posted about Terrence not being in Ironman 2 and The Avengers, IF IT REALLY WASN'T SERIOUS.
Marvel, Feavreau and Theroux really need to take bloggers viewpoints seriously because this replacement issue is steadily growing in the media. The majoriy of bloggers are apparently thinking the same way and your multi-million dollar franchise is already going into "negative controversy mode" even before production/filming is started.
Good luck and blessings to Don as he has now been receiving negative public attention for the first time in his critically acclaimed career. Scrutiny, hatred and boycott should cease upon Cheadle, beacause he is a great humaniterain outside of his Hollywood persona. Still, the studios have not chosen a perfect replacement for Terrence despite Don's talents and millions of dollars at stake. We will see in several months as a franchise heads into what could be a DC movie like meltdown!!!
Reply