To play Nick Fury or not to play Nick Fury, that is the question for Samuel Jackson? Updated 1-22-09

To play Nick Fury or not to play Nick Fury, that is the question for Samuel Jackson? Updated 1-22-09

I'm hoping Marvel has gotten smarter and will not switch out one of their future main characters over a few pennies.

News
By jman1977 - Jan 19, 2009 12:01 AM EST
Filed Under: Nick Fury
Source: Variety

To the surprise of fans everywhere rumors came abound that Samuel L. Jackson' negotiation's with Marvel to reprise his short roll as Nick Fury in Iron Man 2 have fallen through. Nick Fury is a bit role in Iron Man 1 but will no doubt play a heavy hitting role in the next few Marvel movies coming out in the next couple of years. This being said it would be nice to see some continuity from movie to movie. Having the same actor in the same roll not only keeps a sense of a continuing storyline arc through these next few movies but will also help the fans that aren't all that familiar with who Nick Fury is.

Comic book fans know who Nick Fury is and what roll he plays in the Comic book universe. The normal movie going audience does not. They know Nick Fury as Samuel L. Jackson and that's popular to them because he is liked in so many other movies.

The negotiation rumors with Sam are probably over money. If they are then this situation reminds me of the Mcfarlane/Marvel split in the 90's. When Marvel didn't want to up Mcfarlane's pay to stay onboard drawing their most popular title in years. I just wish that someone over at Marvel would suddenly come to the realization that "Hey were making millions of dollars on this movie and other properties lets give the fans what the fans want, even if it costs us some more up front. The returns certainly are there." Besides I call BS on this entire rumor. I'm hoping Marvel has gotten smarter and will not switch out one of their future main characters over a few pennies. Hopefully they will figure it out.

jman

Update: Variety has since confirmed that the breakdown in negotiations is in fact about the salary that Mr. Jackson would earn for reprising his role as Nick Fury. Mickey Rourke is reportedly only earning a base salary of $250,000 for his upcoming role in Iron Man 2. This kind of cheese doesn't cut it for the always yelling even when he talks Samuel L. Jackson.

Sylvester Stallone Shares Thoughts On Superhero Movie Dominance And His Dashed Hopes To Play Nick Fury
Related:

Sylvester Stallone Shares Thoughts On Superhero Movie Dominance And His Dashed Hopes To Play Nick Fury
THOR 5: Chris Hemsworth Addresses His MCU Future And Says That There's Nothing Official (Yet)
Recommended For You:

THOR 5: Chris Hemsworth Addresses His MCU Future And Says That There's "Nothing Official" (Yet)
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?
loganoneil
loganoneil - 1/19/2009, 5:28 PM
"...a few pennies..."?!! Uh, do you realize what A-list actors like Sam Jackson get paid nowadays to make these films?! Part of the reason movie budgets are so sky-high is because of the rIdiculous amounts of money that go to the actors! If he thinks he can squeeze more money out of the studio and they don't feel like paying him, who cares?! It's called 'free-enterprise' people. He's not the only African American actor in Hollywood. Try these on for size - Denzel Washington or Lawrence Fishburn... think about it!

As for your McFarland arguement, from what I understand he became an arrogant egotistical prick (much like Stan Lee) and it was clash of the uber-egos that drove him away! Money was just an excuse.
ichiro
ichiro - 1/20/2009, 12:39 AM
Yeah...the thing though is that they are basing the Nick Fury in the upcoming Marvel movies on Ultimate Nick Fury, who's appearance is based on...Samuel L. Jackson. It's more about the fact that this will not only be PERFECT casting, but it will make comic book nerds cream their boxers.

Plus, do you REALLY want to switch two actors (the other being the Don Cheadle) between two movies?
Shaman
Shaman - 1/20/2009, 1:01 PM
Ichiro, YES!!! TOTALLY!!! I don't give a shit! Make the movie, actors are expendable! What should happen is a freakin LOCK-OUT like the NHL!!! YOU WANT MORE MONEY??? THERE, YOU'RE OUT OF A JOB! Go pay your mansions with your kids education savings! Then you'll LEARN how to appreciate getting good parts for a little bit less money. I wouldn't mind getting 100 000$ per movie, wouldn't you? Noooooo i have to have at least a million. Bunch of over paid panzies!!!
iNsaneMilesy
iNsaneMilesy - 1/20/2009, 11:39 PM
I think what everyone is forgetting is that MARVEL is gonna put out at least 3 movies in 2011. All big budget films ($100million average). Also each A list actor gets between 20 - 25 million. - thats alot of cash to throw around in such a small time frame, and MARVEL isnt that rich. So cost cutting has to come into it. In a perfect world, I would wish that the film came before the actors insane paycheck. What, cant they live off a measly $20million!?
loganoneil
loganoneil - 1/21/2009, 11:07 AM
Guys, as long as they didn't put nipples on Fury's SHEILD uniform, or try and trick-out the SHIELD helicarrier with flourecent neon accents (aka the Shumacher disaster), I would welcome a change to shake up the status quo. Who knows, maybe a new actor might bring a fresh perspective to the part (granted, the 'part' was nothing more than just a 30 second cameo, but still...). Don't get your unitards in a bunch just yet. Let's wait and see IF Jackson declines the part, and IF he does, who would THEN land the part... THEN let the real speculation and conjecture begin! IF it happens, my hopes are on Washington or Fishburn - but that's only IF it happens...
Shaman
Shaman - 1/22/2009, 12:28 PM
Washington wouldn't go for it but Fishburn might! With our luck, we'll probably end up with Omar Epps.
loganoneil
loganoneil - 1/23/2009, 12:12 PM
dcagedeagle - I LOVE that idea! Avery Brooks is a BRILLIANT actor and would do justice to the role!

Shaman - OMAR EPPS?!! Put down the mouse and slowly back away. Your commenting privleges have been suspended! Now go stand in the corner young man and think about what you've done...
MrYetti
MrYetti - 1/24/2009, 1:04 AM
I gotta go with Shaman on this one - the actor is not tied to the role. Heath Ledger died, but I'll bet you the Joker comes back in one of the next Batman flicks. I know it sucks that we may be losing Samuel L., but this pansy-ass, egocentric actor crap is really getting old. Take the small payday, and you will be guaranteed all kinds of royalties later on (toy likeness rights, sequels, etc.). It's not like the guy isn't already rich. I'm not sure we'd get stuck with Omar Epps, but the likelyhood of a B-List actor taking over seems to be a possibility. Personally, I don't see why Jamie Foxx couldn't do it - he'd probably work for cheap, because he's intelligent enough to see what a huge payday the overall product would be.
Pierce_Highmen
Pierce_Highmen - 1/29/2009, 6:00 PM
They are not paying all the A-listers 20-25 Million. If that were the case, the actor salaries for IronMan would have been 100 mill (Paltrow, Howard, Downey & Bridges are all considered A-list, maybe Downey wasnt before IronMan). You usually dont get the 25 million dollar paycheck untill you have a FEW HUGE blockbusters. I.E. Toby McGuire, he didnt get 25 mill for the first Spiderman & SeaBiscuit, but after they did so well in theaters, he got a huge raise, and Producer credits, which equals even more cash.

Shit, Terence Howard was the highest paid actor on IronMan. Howard got 5 mill, and Downey got considerably less, althou im sure he did just fine on the back end.

Usually when you hear an actor is getting 25 million for a movie, its not 25 up front. Its probally 15 guaranteed, then points on the back end, that can end up being worth alot more then 25 million, if the movie does good. Plus all the action figures and DVD, they get cuts of that also.

That's where things broke down with Howard, Marvel probally wanted to give him less up front, but still keep the back end money. That was not good enough for him.

They also offer Ex-Pro titles and credits, which equals a ton more money. Many actors if they believe in the script will take less up front, and more on the back end.

Im sure SLJ, is looking for Howard money, and Marvel isnt willing to put that much out there, especially after the HUGE raise they are giving RDJ. It would be nice to have SLJ in Iron Man 2 and other films, but if they have to change the actor, Im fine with that, because of the short time he was on screen. What did he have, 3 lines?

Does anyone else think that Thunder Bolt Ross will be in Iron Man 2?

Denzel would be worse then SLJ. I dont know if Favreau would be able to reign him in. Denzel is a bigger overactor then SLJ, espically when working with directors he does not respect. You can tell if you pay attention to his performances with different directors. You cant have Fishburn, because he is the voice of Silver Surfer, and arent they making an orgins movie for him? If not that, I heard Stan Lee on radio out here in LA, and he said he wants to do another F4 movie, and the way they ended the last one, SS will most likely be there too.
Related Headlines
Latest Headlines

Hot Headlines Hot Headlines

Sci-Fi & Fantasy

Cartoons & Animated Features

Gaming

Anime & Manga

Horror

Action Movies & TV

Pro Wrestling & MMA News
View Recorder