Somebody’s not happy about Marvel Studios recasting James (War Machine) Rhodes in Iron Man 2.
No, not Don Cheadle; he’s probably pleased. No, not Marvel executives; they’re thrilled. Okay, I’ll give you Terrence Howard, who played Rhodey in the first film. He’s certainly chafed.
But I’m talking about these guys, who are upset enough to launch a website and petition demanding that Marvel Studios change its mind and return Howard to the role.
The message at HowardNOTCheadle.com reads:
ARE YOU A FAN? THEN YOU SHOULD BE OUTRAGED AT MARVEL!
Terrence is being taken for a ride and it’s not in this [arrow points to War Machine armor]
Marvel is under the impression that just any person can play Col. James ‘Rhodey’ Rhodes. They are sadly mistaken.
Marvel asked Terrence Howard to be Rhodey. He signed on to play Rhodey. Terrence Howard became Rhodey.
We were under the impression that when you signed a contract with someone, it was their word. “That’s how Dad did it. That’s how America does it. And it’s worked out pretty good so far.”
Signed,
Future Ticket Holders
From melodramatic to Mom-and-applie pie morality — with a dash of contract law — in just a few sentences. That’s pretty impressive.
The petition, which has attracted nearly 620 signatures since it was started on Oct. 17, shifts to reasoning more familiar to fans of superhero comics:
Terrence Howard will need to be in Iron Man 2, or else Continuity will destroy the entire Franchise.
Presumably, much like Edward Norton and Thomas Jane destroyed — oh, wait.
(Via Slashfilm)
October 29th, 2008 at 11:33 am
And presumably like Maggie Gyllenhall destroyed, oh wait… TDK was only of the biggest films EVER.
Or how about Robin Curtis? Sure, it’s a shame that Kirstie Alley didn’t come back to play Savvik again, but so what? It was still Star Trek.
It’s a bit of a drag that Howard’s not coming back as Rhodey. I’m not fond of when actors get replaced (Damn you for dying, Richard Harris!), but I didn’t go see Iron Man (twice) or buy the DVD for him. What’s the big deal?
Cheadle’s a fine actor, and Favreau and Downey are still on board. Most of you “future ticket holders” will still go see IM2 and probably see The Avengers (unless it totally sucks, and even then you still might) too.
October 29th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
After she passed away, they replaced the awesome lady who played the Oracle in the third Matrix movie, and it was… hmm.
Statement retracted.
TDK was awesome without Katie Holmes, and Matrix sequels were terrible regardless. Perhaps *gasp* movie quality goes beyond who plays supporting roles?
October 29th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
I actually have a THIRD proposal for who should play Jim Rhodes which makes a lot more sense! http://www.comicbycomic.com/2008/10/i-propose-third-jim-rhodes.html
October 29th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
Signed future ticket holders?
That really kills your bargaining power. These people have to believe you WON’T go see the movie unless you get your way. If you’re going to give them your money but bitch the whole time, they still get your money! It’s like people on the far left voting for the Democrats.
October 29th, 2008 at 2:02 pm
What these fanboys fail to realize is that most movie contracts that sign the actor for a sequel(s) are based on whether the producers want the actor back. Not whether the actor is promised the role, not whether the actor wants to continue, but whether the producers want that actor for the role. If they do then the actor has to perform or face penalties. If not, so long and thanks for all the fish. For some reason the producers here decided to get someone else to play Rhodey. What those reasons are we’ll probably never know but that’s how it is. Did they handle it poorly? Perhaps. Did people’s feelings get hurt? Yep. Did they violate the contract? Doubtful. Its not an easy or happy thing when something like this happens but its Hollywood. They ain’t out to make friends.
October 29th, 2008 at 2:24 pm
Like anyone is boycotting over Terrance Howard! Seriously I don’t even want to see War Machine. Who the heck cares about War Machine? There isn’t enough to explore in Iron Man over three movies without bringing in another Iron Man like character?
If they do a Cap movie do you want a movie where he puts on a black costume and becomes The Captain while another guy is Cap? In Thor do you want Thunderstrike?
October 29th, 2008 at 6:15 pm
Love it, Rich! I think Billy Dee’s a little long in the tooth to play Rhodey, but 20 years ago (maybe less)I’d have been all over that idea!
Nice website, BTW… I’ll have to check it out some more. I see you have a link to Wil Wheaton’s blog on the site. That alone makes you incredibly cool, IMO.
October 29th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
Russell, I think the idea behind calling themselves “future ticket holders” is to imply that they WANT to buy tickets for the next Iron Man, The Avengers, and whatever else Marvel Studios has in store, but that they’re going to withhold there money if they don’t get what they want…
Ironically, most (or perhaps ALL) of those “future ticket holders” ARE going to end up seeing the movies anyhow. Are there honestly that many hardcore War Machine fans out there? And how many of them are honestly hardcore Terrance Howard fans? Iron Man was considered “B-list” before the movie came out. That’s gotta make Rhodey “C-list” then. Sorry folks, he’s not the reason the film did the business it did.
I don’t think Cheadle increases the next movie’s appeal, but losing Howard doesn’t hurt it either.
October 29th, 2008 at 7:27 pm
I think Shaun’s hit the nail on the head – I don’t think that Cheadle increases the next movie’s appeal, but losing Howard doesn’t hurt it. They’re both good actors, but Cheadle has the edge for me. He’s simply more versatile.
And honestly, I don’t see this petition getting enough support anyway.
That said, if anyone wants to start one up for Billy Dee Williams, I’m all over it. Age ain’t nothing but a number.
October 30th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
Um, what’s with the Katie Holmes/Maggie Gyllenhall comparison. They were both terrible. Batman Begins/The Dark Knight succeeded in spite of them.
October 30th, 2008 at 8:30 pm
The point being, Darth, that recasting the part didn’t make a difference either way. Both movies were perfectly great no matter who played the part of Rachel.
As for the actresses themselves, neither one of the bothered me. Neither film needed the specific character of Rachel, granted, but I understand that without her all you had was a lot testosterone up on the screen. They needed to have a female character, just for some sense of balance.
Personally, I was grateful that the studio didn’t push for some big romantic angle in Batman Begins. Attraction between Bruce and Rachel, sure, but nothing came of it. I appreciated that! The fact that Katie Holmes didn’t completely suck (IMO) and drag down the movie was enough for me. Same for Gyllenhall. They both had thankless roles (esp. Maggie, since she was just a sacrificial lamb), and they did fine with what they given.
Maybe in the next one we’ll get Talia Al-Ghul or something cool like that.