Why Terrence Howard Won’t Get His Dose of Iron Man 2

Posted by Adam Sweeney (adam@filmschoolrejects.com) on November 6, 2008

Terrence Howard

By now you’ve probably heard that there won’t be a “next time, baby,” for Terrence Howard in Iron Man 2. Now we know why, a bout over the Benjamins and bad behavior.

Everything seemed to be set for Terrence Howard to receive an expanded role in Iron Man 2 as Colonel Jim Rhodes. The character even gave us the heads up with a quick one-liner in the original. But as negotiations began for Iron Man 2 things rumors started flying that the relationship between Howard and Marvel Studios were starting to fall apart. Now it seems, according to EW.com, that there were cracks in the foundation long before that.

To understand the tangled web behind Howard’s dismissal it is important to note that he received a larger contract that anyone on Iron Man. Howard was the first actor signed and the highest paid. How Howard made more money than central characters like, oh, Robert Downey Jr. is beyond me. But it happened and once the ball got rolling it was too late to change his contract.

Many Hollywood insiders have claimed that the dropping of Howard, who was replaced with Don Cheadle, largely came from his frustrating behavior on the set of Iron Man. It’s also been reported that Jon Favreau, director of Iron Man, and his producers were extremely unhappy with Howard’s performance, often having to spend lengthy time periods editing and reshooting his particular scenes.

Due the difficulty they had with Howard as an actor, Favreau and screenwriter Justin Theroux found themselves cutting back on Rhodes’ storyline as they fleshed out the script for the sequel. When Marvel noticed they were cutting back on Howard’s involvement they went to his agent and asked him to take a revised salary similar to the supporting characters in the original. Howard’s agents were shocked by the pay cut, which is estimated at 50-80 percent of what Howard got in Iron Man, and questioned the reasoning behind it. Marvel never told Howard’s agents that they took issue with his on-set behavior.

It’s amazing to me that Howard’s contract couldn’t have been worked out for Iron Man 2. The film is going to rake in the dough so you think there would be enough of the cabbage to go around. Having said that, this is Hollywood, the and where only egos overshadow salaries.

I am a bit disappointed that Howard won’t be in the sequel. I have always been impressed with his work and his uptight attitude as Col. Rhodes played well off of the cockiness of Tony Stark. Still, I have no doubt that Don Cheadle, one of the most underrated actors in Hollywood, can do the job. I just hope this won’t sour the relationship between any other co-stars. But, as they say, business is business … even for superhero sidekicks.


Read more articles by Adam Sweeney

Related Reading:

Your Ad Here

Comment Policy: No hate speech allowed. If you must argue, please debate intelligently. Comments containing selected keywords or outbound links will be put into moderation to help prevent spam. Film School Rejects reserves the right to delete comments and ban anyone who doesn't follow the rules. We also reserve the right to modify any curse words in your comments and make you look like an idiot. Thank You!

  • I just don't buy that Howard's paycheck was bigger than anyone else received. I don't believe it, not even for a second.

    That said, I also don't care that he's gone. It's like if they had swapped out Gwyneth Paltrow... so what. Downey and Favreau are the only integral pieces of the Iron Man puzzle.
  • JuicyT
    Agreed, although I would rather Howard go than Paltrow, she kinda has the awkward cuteness that's perfect as Tony Stark's love interest.
  • It still does not jive with me. I read the article online yesterday. And was taken aback. The only reason I could see TH getting more money is people have forgotten, even though RDJ is an "extremely talented actor of his generation". His personal demons still follow him. It wasn't until lately that he was even insurable because of his past "Drug and Alcohol Abuse". The studios don't care how talented you are if you are a "fuck-up" and he was. RDJ had to pay his own bond to work on films because of his past transgressions. So with that in mind and Gwen has never been a major draw on her own. Now that she's post babies she's not looking for leading roles anymore. So her pay you can understand.

    With this information now figure in the absence of the truth. Jon always went to his blog to clear things up until the money issue came down the pike. He became ghostlike he was so mumm on the subject. But again you never heard of bad behavior from TH coming from any other set or movie he's worked on. Like I Said This Is Going To Hurt The Man's Credibility As An Actor. He's never been associated as Mr. Tantrum on set. So why label him now with this? I say it's all BULLSHIT! And someone's hiding something, it just does not make any (logical)sense.
  • JMoney
    does filmschoolrejects not have an editor? fix the typos before you post the story
  • Mike D
    "does filmschoolrejects not have an editor? fix the typos before you post the story"

    Said the guy who doesn't use capitalization and periods.
  • Patrick Ramser
    I remember seeing a post a little while back with Terrance responding. He played it off real cool if I remember, like nothing seemed to be wrong. When putting that and this together, it doesn't make sense even more.

    I'm going to agree with Jackie boy, someone is hiding something.

    I'll bet they're only doing this because they can get away with it. Dark Knight was a smash hit regardless of when Gyllenhal (spelled wrong I bet) replaced Holmes. They know they can do the same without repercussion. And with how big Iron Man was (second to only Dark Knight, again) I'm sure some pretty wonderful actors asked to be involved.
  • Nevernude
    yeah im guessing Marvel are looking for sme big hitting actors/actresses in their movies. Since both IM and TIH did quite well commercially, Marvel is fast becoming a powerhouse studio in Hollywood and some big name actors will want to hit a ride. With that in mind, i have a feeling Marvel ditched the less well known Terrence Howard for the more prolific Don Cheadle. Cheadle has a bigger reputation in Hollywood than Howard and Marvel definitely wanted a slice of him. Terrence Howard got short-changed. Looking back at an interview he did soon after IM did very well, it seemed like Howard desperately wanted to be a part of the IM franchise to raise his profile among film makers and audiences.

    Sad really. Howard seems like a great guy and i feel sorry for him. He did nothing wrong. Marvel are being very greedy indeed. Still...in business terms, greed for lack of a better word is good.
  • Thank you Mike D. Jmoney, if you don't have something constructive to say then why are you commenting? Just saying. And here's a thought, talk about the TOPIC. Thanks, broseph.
  • TL
    I read the EW article. It's interesting that all of a sudden everyone is saying TH was "difficult to work with" on the IM set.
  • JMoney
    I usualy do talk about the topic, but there were a lot of errors and it was distracting.

    as for the article, regardless of any of these inside "stories" i think Don Cheadle is a bad choice for War Machine, he is too slight.
blog comments powered by Disqus