[kevin]

Originally Posted by MissionTrek08

I can agree with all that, but to make your point, you're saying Terrence Howard has somehow surpassed Downey's take at box offices, which I don't see happening when comparing their resumes.

He's a fine actor, don't get me wrong. But he certainly hasn't enjoyed the number of lead performances in higher profile films than Downey. In power brokerage terms, Downey's had a longer, more sustained leading man career, at least relatively speaking.

Was Howard right to turn down the sequel money? It depends on what they offered him, and the size of his role in the new film. I thought Howard did well in IRON MAN, and Cheadle will be an interesting actor to step into the role. We'll certainly see much from Howard in the future, IRON MAN or not.

Obviously overall in terms of career earnings RDJ has the edge on Howard, as he's been around far longer, but in terms of the last few years, by Box Office Mojo's records RDJ hasn't had a major earner that he wasn't supporting in in some time (Gothika and Shaggy Dog were mid-size hits but he didn't topline them).

So he has no solo track record to demand anything, neither does Howard to be fair, but the behind the scenes info may clue things up a bit.

Upon reading the article, it suggests that Howard was locked in to the film at an early stage, prior to anyone else and then when everything was sealed with the rest of the cast, they couldn't renegotiate.

An unintended situation perhaps, but what seems to have happened because he came on early enough.

[MissionTrek08]

Originally Posted by kevin

Obviously overall in terms of career earnings RDJ has the edge on Howard, as he's been around far longer, but in terms of the last few years, by Box Office Mojo's records RDJ hasn't had a major earner that he wasn't supporting in in some time (Gothika and Shaggy Dog were mid-size hits but he didn't topline them).

So he has no solo track record to demand anything, neither does Howard to be fair, but the behind the scenes info may clue things up a bit.

Yet he continues to star in major productions as the lead (SHERLOCK HOLMES, THE SOLOIST) while Howard's latest film is FIGHTING, and he doesn't even appear to be the lead. If he were starring opposite Downey in SOLOIST, I'd certainly say they were on par with each other.

At any rate, it's all academic now in IRON MAN terms. I'm guessing not being in THE AVENGERS frees up Howard to star in future films during that production window, and that may end up being best for advancing his career to even higher levels. He doesn't appear to be harboring a grudge against Marvel, and that's a positive attitude. Opportunites happen.

[kevin]

Originally Posted by MissionTrek08

Yet he continues to star in major productions as the lead (SHERLOCK HOLMES, THE SOLOIST) while Howard's latest film is FIGHTING, and he doesn't even appear to be the lead. If he were starring opposite Downey in SOLOIST, I'd certainly say they were on par with each other.

Hey, it's Hollywood - everyone rises and falls! This is all true now, but back then when the film was being made, it was a little different. That's what Iron Man has done for RDJ's career.

That said, in the credit crunch era they have supposedly only offered $250,000 to Mickey Rourke for his role.

At any rate, it's all academic now in IRON MAN terms. I'm guessing not being in THE AVENGERS frees up Howard to star in future films during that production window, and that may end up being best for advancing his career to even higher levels. He doesn't appear to be harboring a grudge against Marvel, and that's a positive attitude. Opportunites happen.

It was only ever meant to be an example.

[Captain Frank]

Originally Posted by horatio

I fail to see why someone who drives a hard bargain in a wage negotiation is supposed to be an egomaniac jerk.

I didn't say that.
Why did you make that connection?
I only suggested that:
If there was a jerk on the set,
and if he had a huge ego,
he would demand more money.

[kevin]

I'm confused - William Shatner isn't in this film.