Not sure what to make of the news, in today’s Hollywood Reporter, that Don Cheadle will be replacing Terrence Howard in Iron Man 2. The article hints that Howard wanted too much money for the sequel, which will see his character, sidekick Jim Rhodes, playing a bigger role, perhaps fulfilling his comic-book destiny as Marvel hero War Machine. But the absence of a deal with Howard also allowed Marvel to "take the role in another direction" by approaching Cheadle, the Reporter says.
What does that mean? Marvel’s not talking about acting talent here; Crash costars Howard and Cheadle are both top-notch, Oscar-nominated actors. But Howard has an intense, leading-man charisma, while Cheadle is a chameleonic actor who seems to vanish into his roles. Some Iron Man viewers found Howard odd and out of place in the film; others cheered him on, especially when he looked at that suit of armor and said, "Next time." What does the fact that "next time" now belongs to Cheadle mean for the Rhodes character and his prominence in the sequel? Will fans prefer Cheadle to Howard, or will they resent any change in the first film’s winning formula? Weigh in below, PopWatchers.
More on Iron Man 2:
Comic-Con 2008: What’s next for the Iron Man franchise
Director Jon Favreau talks about Iron Man’s success and the sequel plans
PopWatch: How soon do you want another Iron Man movie?
Release dates for Iron Man 2 and other upcoming Marvel movies
Hollywood Insider: Justin Theroux to write Iron Man 2
First Look: Robert Downey Jr. in an extra from the Iron Man DVD
Comments (1-30) of 438 Add your comment
Don Cheadle = super intense actor. He doesn’t really strike me as a funny, charismatic Tony Stark friend, especially because Downey is so extremely awesome in the role. Howard brought a little realism and he was definitely a great fit. All I think of when I see Cheadle is how sad Hotel Rwanda was…
This news kind of sucks, majorly.
I don’t have anything against either one of them, but I think for this role I slightly prefer Howard.
I think it will be ok. I wasn’t really impressed with Howard in the first place. I thought he was flat in a world of characters that popped. I also think that his role was small enough that it wont matter.
Cheadle, always. He’s so fantastic in everything he’s in, and he’s in everything. Why doesn’t he have an Oscar yet?
I don’t like it when studios change actors in major films, but since I like Don Cheadle, I’m ok with it. I’ll still see the film.
Not to mention, how much money could Howard have been asking for? It’s not like he was the star of the movie or anything….
Good Lord, this is bad. I cannot STAND Don Cheadle. I don’t know why, he’s really always just ruined everything he’s been in for me. I think he is immensely overrated as an actor, and as a replacement for Terence Howard? No, no, and no. Just give him the money, guys.
This is an odd move, but I guess if Maggie Gyllennhal (I know it’s misspelled) can replace Katie Holmes for The Dark Knight, I can deal with this shift as well. I wonder why Terence Howard really opted out, though.
Just saw IM on dvd this past weekend. Really, either could play that role, didn’t require much acting chops. Actually, I found Terence Howard a bit flat, he looked bored.
All I can say is YES! Terrence Howard’s recent comments in the media have been extremely offensive towards women and I was planning to watch this sequel in spite of him being in it, not because he is in it. Don Cheadle is phenomenal and will be much better (and actually charming rather than annoying) in this role.
Honestly I don’t think many people will notice the difference (apologies to fans of both actors)
What I don’t understand is weren’t all the actors already signed on for two movies at least? That and pretty much everyone, in the press events before the movie, and the interviews after, praised Howard for helping “Iron Man” get on to the big screen because of his attachment to the War Machine character, he was on the project even before Downey or Favreau were signed on.
That, and Marvel constantly touting the line that people come for the heroes, not the actors, is such *bull.* Marvel differentiated itself from DC by having superheroes who were flawed, distinct personalities, not archetypes, and when you translate those properties to film, the actor plays a huge part in bringing that personality to the screen. They shouldn’t be treated simply as interchangeable faces behind a mask.
…wow, that was totally an essay. Yikes. Strong feelings, I has them.
I can’t believe that Don Cheadle costs any less money than Terrance Howard would want, so I imagine that this is a step in possibly giving Rhodey/War machine a spin-off since Cheadle is more of a top-line star and could probably open a movie better than Howard (especially internationally).
I hadn’t seen anything with Howard prior to Iron Man, so I guess I was expecting more. He had the look, but, to me at least, he came off as too soft.
Cheadle doesnt have the look (without a bunch of pre-movie bulking up at least), but I’ve very much enjoyed him in everything I’ve seen him in.
So my vote: Not enthusiastic, but also not dissapointed.
Sorella, Terrence Howard always looks bored. My guess is that, while money may have part of the issue, the producers may have decided that he’s not really worth the hassle. He has a reputation for being extremely difficult.
Elena, Cheadle’s not that intense of an actor. He’s actually really good in comedic roles. He was excellent in Talk to Me and Devil in a Blue Dress and in his guest performances on the Bernie Mac show.
I haven’t seen Ironman yet so I don’t know what the character requires. My initial concern would be that Cheadle’s quite a bit smaller than Howard but that may not matter.
I love Don Cheadle, so I’m happy —and doesn’t Howard have a really bad reputation in Hollywood of being arrogant and difficult to work with?
I don’t like the message of interchangeable actors, honestly, but I get that there must have been something we don’t know about it behind the scenes. t3hdow made the comparison to switching out Katie Holmes in The Dark Knight, but that character didn’t require much and (spoiler alert) was just going to die anyway. Don Cheadle is small and really doesn’t seem very athletic/muscular, so setting him up for that kind of role seems odd. Howard at least has the right build and is younger.
Both are very good actors but I really thought that Terrence Howard’s Charactor was a little to weak to be the Rough and tumble James Rhoads he really needs to be a strong Navy seals / Green Barette type guy now they have Don Cheadly who is also a amazing actor but a polar opposite of what the Charactor should be I really hate to see this as the Iron Man franchise could be very strong and a lot of times a sequel can kill the franchise
Chiwetel Ejiofor would be perfect casting.
Don Cheadle is a bit too “nerdish” and Terrence Howard was a bit too “femme” in the role.
On a somewhat related note, “The Incredible Hulk” hits DVD next week and there’s a flash look at Captain America buried in the ice during an “alternate beginning” extra.
I was thinking Dexter’s Michael C. Hall would make a perfect Cap.
Wouldn’t Tim Meadows be cheaper than either?
BOTH are great actors. Howard’s stature is great. Cheadle is a bit “small” for the role. HOWARD should remain — BUT maybe a solid piece of HUMBLE PIE is what Howard needed. Give him another chance to make a lower bid for the character and if IM2 doesn’t just tank and sadly kill the franchise, then give them all a raise going into IM3!!!
You guys are so right and so wrong. Terrence did a decent job as a space filler even though he’s a good actor but Don Cheadle…Don is a king (no pun intended). Every single role that Cheadle has been in has been a success. He made a name for himself by making weak characters strong. It was relatively recently that he started getting leading roles after playing next to Nicholas Cage, Denzel, etc. Playing next to Downey is going to be sensational. Both of those guys are extremely chameleon like. They’re like twins.
Oh please KEITH DAVID (Platoon, Crash)is the obvious choice – big physically imposing guy with acting chops and a great voice – he was BORN to play Rhodes – plus a real hero, saved Charlie Sheen’s life during shooting of Platoon – perfect casting.
terrence howard should have done it
he was perfect in the 1st one
Well this stinks. I definitely think that they should have negotiated somehow with Howard, him and Robert had a really good brotherly chemistry going on in that movie and I think it is going to change a lot now that he isnt going to be in it. Oh well, i guess we have to just wait and see what happens. But i for one liked Howard.
Cheadle may not fit the typical superhero mold, but neither did Robert Downey Jr. and look how good that turned out? I think it will be great. I have loved him since Picket Fences.
If they need a ruggedly built guy for the role then they should choose someone like Boris Kodjoe or LL cool J. Both have great looks and even better muscular bodies.
That’s too bad. I liked T.H. But D.C. is a good actor so there won’t be anything lost as far as talent goes.
wasn’t don cheadle in tropic thunder? http://screenrant.com/images/downey-jr-tropic-thunder.jpg
…they can twist the story line that they are both long lost brothers. You know, like an M. Night Shayamalan type thing. (lol)