Iron Man 2 Won't End on a Cliffhanger

Iron Man 2 Won't End on a Cliffhanger

Director Jon Favreau explains the need to make Iron Man 2 a "self-contained" story!

News
By bsprecher - Apr 15, 2010 05:04 AM EST
Filed Under: Iron Man 2
Source: L.A. Times

Even though planning for Iron Man 3 is already in the early stages, director Jon Favreau doesn't want you to think of Iron Man 2 as the second act of a trilogy. There will be no cliffhanger endings in this movie!

"I want it to be completely self-contained because a lot is going to happen between now and the next chapter. You've got Thor, you've got Captain America and you've got Avengers. I don't know how all of that is going to impact this little handmade story of ours that we've been doing over the last two films."

"You want to leave some things open, you know, to be like a food cache for them to set things up that can be paid-off later and lean toward where we think things are going. But we can't leave it like Empire where you're waiting to see it resolved. It's not a cliffhanger. We had to tuck this whole story in. And that be said, we had like eight different story-lines going and opened up the door, especially with both the good guys and the bad guys, for a larger story to be told. That's just responsible film-making. But if you just watch this movie it's self-contained. It's not like Two Towers."

Iron Man 2 opens May 7th!
Marvel Creative Committee Nixed IRON MAN 2 Scene With A Drunk Tony Stark Hitting Pepper Potts
Related:

Marvel Creative Committee Nixed IRON MAN 2 Scene With A Drunk Tony Stark Hitting Pepper Potts
IRON MAN 2: New Details Emerge About Why Demon In A Bottle Storyline Was Scrapped
Recommended For You:

IRON MAN 2: New Details Emerge About Why "Demon In A Bottle" Storyline Was Scrapped
DISCLAIMER: ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and... [MORE]

ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

Do you have what it takes to write for us?
Want to contribute?
Thekevin
Thekevin - 4/15/2010, 5:40 AM
Fister!! Suckaa!!
GreenHalJordan
GreenHalJordan - 4/15/2010, 5:43 AM
Second!
Thekevin
Thekevin - 4/15/2010, 5:45 AM
I think that's what they have to do considering CA and thor much easier to work a story in for it to make sense in CA, thor and Avengers. Don't leave us with a bunch of "how this happen when this happen in that movie?"questions.
ElBicho
ElBicho - 4/15/2010, 5:57 AM
This mean there will be no "bonus scene" post-credits?
IronClad
IronClad - 4/15/2010, 5:58 AM
congrats Blackout! how does this compare w/ your being first to take a peak inside teabag's a$$hole and play "what's that nut?"
IronClad
IronClad - 4/15/2010, 6:04 AM
pistachio?!



no, no... cashew!!!

yaaaaaaaaayyy!!!

Bandrews1
Bandrews1 - 4/15/2010, 6:08 AM
Interesting.
Shaman
Shaman - 4/15/2010, 6:24 AM
GLAD to hear it cause i thought 2 Towers sucked as a stand alone film. As a part of the whole story, it wasn't that bad but still the worst part of the trilogy IMO. If they were capable of ending The Fellowship with a smooth enough cliffhanger, i don't get why they couldn't do the same for 2 Towers. That part felt rushed and half assed when you don't have the other two chapters to accompany it. I for one have to watch all three the same day or else it sucks.
LEEE777
LEEE777 - 4/15/2010, 6:48 AM
Cliffhangers mean normally 100% sequel!

Though we better be getting an IRON MAN 3!!

(ARMOR WARS) or (DEMON IN THE BOTTLE) though two should've been that! ; D

SHAMAN??

Dude TWO TOWERS is like that because all the LOTR movies was set out and filmed as a TRILOGY lol????

I like cliffhangers.. look at EMPIRE STRIKES BACK and X2!!

Blackout & Green Lantern @

....


antz1104
antz1104 - 4/15/2010, 6:52 AM
Nice to hear, there's enough sequels and movies setting up for the almighty trilogy. Just make a damn good movie, and then try to make another. Good find Brent!
LEEE777
LEEE777 - 4/15/2010, 7:00 AM
P.s. How many new articles in a matter of hours?? ; P

I'm [frick]ing off to FAN-FIC! : D
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 4/15/2010, 7:15 AM
@ elbicho

no thats not what it means. it just means that it won't end like the last one. like how it ended with Stark telling the world he's Iron Man. that was a cliff hanger.

the post credit, easter eggs for Thor, Cap, or Avengers will most likely still be there, because its not a cliff hanger for the next Iron Man movie.
11viking11
11viking11 - 4/15/2010, 7:32 AM
"You want to leave some things open, you know, to be like a food cache for them to set things up..."

the man really knows how to play the strings... he is the front man, and the man is teaching well... let's see if Johnston is doing the homeworks to get an A+ (or at least an C+).
DarkWebs
DarkWebs - 4/15/2010, 7:41 AM
@ Elbicho yes there is an easter egg at the end of the credits
JoshWilding
JoshWilding - 4/15/2010, 8:00 AM
Only 14 days to go!!! :D

I just hope that we get some sort of build up to Thor or The First Avenger at the end of the movie or after the credits..!
DogsOfWar
DogsOfWar - 4/15/2010, 8:31 AM
LOTR & IM are apples and oranges. LOTR followed a set series of books and was envisioned as a trilogy, nothing more, nothing less. IM is built off of 40 years of stories and is expanding into Avengers as well. It will always be somewhat open ended for further movies to be made.

Which is how it should be.
fanboiii
fanboiii - 4/15/2010, 8:53 AM
I think all these movies should be self-contained just like Nolan's Batman. Thinking you have to do a trilogy will just make things come out forced, like Spidey 3 and X3. I hope Batman 3 will finally break that cycle.
Shaman
Shaman - 4/15/2010, 9:15 AM
LEEE- Dude i KNOW they're part of a trilogy. Yet, i could watch the first or last chapter of the trilogy on it's own without feeling the need for anything else. With Two Towers i can't. Jackson didn't film the books, he adapted them to film. There's a huge difference. It's all in the film making. Jackson COULD have filmed the exact same film but with a slightly better opening and end so that it could stand alone like the other two. He did not do that hence why the film on it's own sucks regardless if it's part of a trilogy. That's a HUGE detail a director should concider when filming an arch. I'm just glad Favreau does. If Jackson couldn't film it slightly differently to make it a better film because it would involve changing too much of the source, then that means that Two Towers was a sucky ass book. Name any other book series, each book SHOULD be able to stand on it's own regardless if there are 3 or 20 in the series. If the second book can't stand on it's own with a proper beggining and a proper ending then it's not a [frick]ing book, it's a chapter that quite frankly SHOULDN'T be sold separately. It should then be ONE huge book, period.
GUNSMITH
GUNSMITH - 4/15/2010, 9:53 AM
ITS COOL IF ITS SELF CONTAINED..JUST GIVE ME THIS IN THE END...

EASTER EGGS FOR OTHER MOVIES...AN ITS ALL GOOD.
Talontd
Talontd - 4/15/2010, 10:22 AM
Damn @Shaman, that made complete sense. Good explanation...
ThoroughbredSteele0
ThoroughbredSteele0 - 4/15/2010, 10:30 AM
good, I cant stand when movies do that shit. the end of any movie should never say "to be continued", I'm looking at you Matrix. what a load of crap those sequels turned out to be.
edelkin
edelkin - 4/15/2010, 10:40 AM
Actually, LOTR was one big book that the publishing house broke up into three books. And there should have more than three movies to cover the story.

First time poster.
Shaman
Shaman - 4/15/2010, 10:55 AM
Talontd- Well i do try LOL Thanks bud ;)

ThoroughbredSteele0- THANK YOU!!! YES!!! That's another great example. It was highly unnecessary for them to use that method. Yet they did and IMO, the trilogy suffered from it.

edelkin- Well there you go. That actually explains alot as to why the second chapter felt rushed. Jackson probably didn't attribute much importance to it as much as the other two.

And WELCOME :))
1chris2
1chris2 - 4/15/2010, 12:56 PM
they are doing a ironman 3 after the avengers, so why cant they do a hulk sequel after as well.?
1chris2
1chris2 - 4/15/2010, 12:57 PM
they are doing a ironman 3 after the avengers, so why cant they do a hulk sequel after as well.?
Shaman
Shaman - 4/15/2010, 1:42 PM
Cause Hulk's concept sucks for a stand alone film. He's better off as a small part of the Avengers. We've seen him rampage about and tear Abomination a new one, so thats a "been there done that" scenario. Lets move on.
SirJediFrank
SirJediFrank - 4/15/2010, 3:31 PM
Yeah the end of Matrix Reloaded is one of the worst movie experiences of my life.. though, the Wachoswsky(?) brothers said they wanted to make a BIG SECOND PART but WB said no, so they split it in two.. stupid anyway.

as for Favreau´s comments, it´s GREAT he wants to wait until de Avengers movieverse unfolds in an ORGAIC WAY, so IM3 will stand on its own.. AND not making a RUSHED 3rd part only becasue of the $$$ucSSeSS it already has.

@edelkin welcome!
Macksimus
Macksimus - 4/16/2010, 11:48 AM
I don't want a cliff hanger, but at least give us some kind of subtle reference to the Mandarin. He's got to be the villain in the next movie. Do something similar to what "Batman Begins" did at the end with the Joker.
Bijous
Bijous - 4/17/2010, 2:06 PM
As if he needed any more nerd cred, Favreau gives it to us with his two movie references! You're the ma, Jon!
bsprecher
bsprecher - 4/21/2010, 4:31 AM
Just found out I will be attending the Iron Man 2 premiere in L.A. on Thursday and the press junket on Friday! Stay tuned for more!
jazenb
jazenb - 4/23/2010, 2:26 PM
good to hear..no need...no BS...jsut look forward to a new adventure for IR3...YES !!!!!
Related Headlines
Latest Headlines

Hot Headlines Hot Headlines

Sci-Fi & Fantasy

Anime & Manga

Gaming

Horror

Cartoons & Animated Features

Action Movies & TV

Pro Wrestling & MMA News
View Recorder