So Jon Favreau has officially hung up his armor and left the Iron Man franchise. Who should take over for Iron Man 3?
There are a lot of factors involved with why certain directors might or might not work for Iron Man 3, but here are the three main ones: one, they have to deal with a studio (Marvel) that likes to micromanage and now wants all its movies to interconnect; two, the star in this case (Robert Downey Jr.) has a lot of say over the film and the script; and three, Marvel is famous for wanting to make movies as cheaply as possible.
Having said that, here's five directors who could get the job done, plus two who we wouldn't want to see try.
Pro: Whedon is writing and directing The Avengers, so he'll have experience dealing with Downey and the entire cinematic Marvel universe and can just continue along from there. He's also (no offense, Joss) not an A-list director, so his price is probably right.
Con: The problem is, what if he really screws up The Avengers? He's never tackled anything this big, so handing him another tentpole before he even finishes one could be risky.
Pro: Snyder knows how to handle big-budget spectacles and has a unique visual style, which is probably one of the reasons Chris Nolan picked him to direct the new Superman movie.
Con: His involvement with that franchise may preclude him from coming over to the Marvel team for a while ... if ever. Plus his asking price and that visual aesthetic of his might not be to Marvel's taste.
Pro: Blomkamp has made just one feature film—but that movie, the stunning District 9, showcased an amazing new talent who could work with characters, high-tech effects and complicated action scenes, and all for about one-fifth of the typical studio blockbuster budget.
Con: Blomkamp, however, likes developing projects on his own and may not want to fall under the Marvel (and owner Disney) microscope.
Pro: Coming off her Best Director Oscar for The Hurt Locker, Bigelow would be a real coup and prestige choice for Marvel (not to mention historic as the first female director of a superhero movie). Plus she is simply an amazing action director—just look at The Hurt Locker again.
Con: That Best Director Oscar has a funny way of elevating a filmmaker's salary, so Bigelow might already be out of Marvel's comfort zone. In addition, joining a franchise on its third movie might be perceived as a step backward for her.
Pro: Singer knows his way around both the Marvel universe and the company's corporate structure, and he's already come back in a sense to oversee the new X-Men: First Class movie. Since his two X-Men movies were a big part of Marvel's ascent, why not give him a chance to re-ignite Iron Man?
Con: Singer already has a number of other projects lined up, and while he may be comfortable producing for Marvel, he might not want to get back in the director's chair with the powers-that-be looking over his shoulder. Plus he dropped the ball bigtime with the listless Superman Returns.
As for the two who should be kept away:
Con: Ratner was brought in to make X-Men: The Last Stand after Singer bailed, and we know what happened there. Although that was a rush job (to be fair), his other films show no vision, no style and no ambition other than to get pictures on the screen.
Con: We're not sure why there seems to be a decent amount of love for Leterrier in studio suites, unless maybe he comes cheap and does what he's told. But his The Incredible Hulk was incredibly underwhelming, and Clash of the Titans was about as dumb as a fantasy film can get. The Iron Man movies are supposed to be smart, right?
So who do YOU think are right and wrong for Iron Man 3?