GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Don Cheadle in Iron Man 2 (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=863643)

Sly 10-21-2008 09:04 PM

Don Cheadle in Iron Man 2
 
I like Don but hate when they swap out actors...

http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/terr...ward_blog.html

tony286 10-21-2008 09:05 PM

i always like don

The Duck 10-21-2008 09:07 PM

what why would the do that

Deej 10-21-2008 09:10 PM

Why in the fuck?

Did he fuck up?

I dont see any other reason to replace him. Cheadle is good but that will only turn negative feelings up

uno 10-21-2008 09:12 PM

agreed sly.

Bro Media - BANNED FOR LIFE 10-21-2008 09:33 PM

Wtf.... SMFB.

starpimps 10-21-2008 09:36 PM

thats odd

After Shock Media 10-21-2008 09:42 PM

Willing to bet if people dig deep you will find a very greedy agent who fucked it all up for him. That and since Marvel is new to the movie studio business, one would imagine they would use some of the very same lame ass penny pinching they did in the comics world that caused so many to jump shit - pre comic meltdown of late 90's.

Malicious Biz 10-21-2008 10:47 PM

gggaaaayyyyyyyy

tiger 10-21-2008 10:52 PM

WTF did they do that for?

Corleone 10-21-2008 10:54 PM

hmm hate it when they change actors.. wonder what happened

pigman 10-21-2008 11:42 PM

Will they integrate the hulk and Iron man in the next movie?

TidalWave 10-22-2008 12:12 AM

wtf Don Cheadle sucks. pretty ridiculous doing an actor swap.

Marcus Aurelius 10-22-2008 12:24 AM

That sucks. When you have an ensemble cast and you swap players in a sequel its usually a surefire way to lose a part of your audience.

GatorB 10-22-2008 01:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MDCQ (Post 14934312)
That sucks. When you have an ensemble cast and you swap players in a sequel its usually a surefire way to lose a part of your audience.

Yeah. I mean look at the Dark Knight. Batman Begins made $205 million US and then they replace Kate Holmes and the Dark Knight only made $527 million US.

aico 10-22-2008 01:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GatorB (Post 14934450)
Yeah. I mean look at the Dark Knight. Batman Begins made $205 million US and then they replace Kate Holmes and the Dark Knight only made $527 million US.

Kate Holmes passed on Dark Knight, big difference.

Marcus Aurelius 10-22-2008 01:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GatorB (Post 14934450)
Yeah. I mean look at the Dark Knight. Batman Begins made $205 million US and then they replace Kate Holmes and the Dark Knight only made $527 million US.


This is true. But Katie Holmes was forgettable in that role also and with all the bullshit hype surrounding her and Cruise it probably only helped the franchise by not having her.

Horny Alf 10-22-2008 01:38 AM

Hopefully Don buffs up for this role

qxm 10-22-2008 01:55 AM

wha? they keep replacing actors? WTF?

http://www.waste.org/~beaucoup/images/kitten.jpg

NinjaSteve 10-22-2008 02:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aico (Post 14934464)
Kate Holmes passed on Dark Knight, big difference.

I doubt most of the movie audience cares about an actor passing on a job or the studio changing their mind.

GatorB 10-22-2008 02:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MDCQ (Post 14934465)
This is true. But Katie Holmes was forgettable in that role also and with all the bullshit hype surrounding her and Cruise it probably only helped the franchise by not having her.

I haven't seen the movie but from the reviews I read this guy was pretty forgettable too. In fact he was the wost part of the movie according to most reviewers. Most said he could have not been in the movie and it'd still be the same movie. In other words he added nothing to it. So sounds the same to me.

aico 10-22-2008 02:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NinjaSteve (Post 14934547)
I doubt most of the movie audience cares about an actor passing on a job or the studio changing their mind.

Movies that deal with Comic Books require more of a consistency, the die hards don't like changes in characters.

jimbona 10-22-2008 05:12 AM

They dumped Terrence Howard as he apparently asked for to much for the next film.
Then Howard did a press release stating he was in talks about getting a contract agreed and he found out in the mean time he had been replaced by cheadle.

So he was pissed. His part wasnt major in IronMan, but alot wont like the change.
But it wont harm the film that much.

Martin 10-22-2008 05:43 AM

I don't think IM was that strong for a part 2. It's gonna suck for sure.

bloggingseo 10-22-2008 05:49 AM

I really like Don Cheadle, and I wish him the best, but that role belonged to Howard. I actually liked him in the Iron Man movie and I just like Terrence Howard period. He's talented. Well I don't think this would stop me from seeing the sequel and probably still liking it since I loved Robert Downey Jr. and Gwyneth Paltrow in Ironman! So I don't think they will lose out on much business by not having Terrence, but I don't personally like it since I thought he deserved the role after doing pretty well in the original. However, Don Cheadle is one of my favorites so I don't think I'll feel that guilty for enjoying the movie but probably a little bit

Oh well, Terrence will find something else. He's talented and he'll be all right. I'm sure this is only an ego bruise, it's not like he's a broke actor. He will find other roles and do just fine.

StuartD 10-22-2008 05:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin (Post 14935012)
I don't think IM was that strong for a part 2. It's gonna suck for sure.

Apparently you didn't watch the same movie that everyone else watched.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:02 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123