And I think as James Bond, as that series has reinvigorated itself by moving closer to the… almost to the BOURNE IDENTITY approach, it’s leaving behind this really fun world that seems anachronistic for Bond now. There was a tonal swagger to it and there was a sense of really having a window into the way the other half lives, in an over-the-top way. There’s definitely a sense of humor…that the Roger Moore James Bonds or the Sean Connery James Bonds had when I was growing up.
There’s certain things like set extension, that will help us open the movie up and allow us to shoot in various places but I have to complete all the work and be much more ambitious as far as our locations go and open this up.Īnd I think that there’s a real James Bond quality to Tony Stark that James Bond seems to have left behind and nobody’s doing it. But the stuff in DARK KNIGHT, many of those buildings when he was hang gliding weren’t real. There are things where it’s extremely convincing and there are areas where I want to try and incorporate practical aspects that normally aren’t. Now I’m confident in my vendors, I’m confident in my level of understanding of CGI and a level of technology. I think I was a little too conservative, at times, with the action. You don’t want to be too much of a luddite. Because the digital suit actually looked better at times than the real one, and moved more naturally, but you don’t ever want to get to the point where you’re so confident in the digital realm that he begins to move and act in ways he couldn’t in a practical realm, you do want to keep them guessing.Īnd there are certain moments where you’re just going to cut loose and you just know there’s no other way to do it. And a lot of times…we shot a lot of it practically, we ended up replacing much of it. And I think people think there’s a lot more practical in it than there is. You wouldn’t have had people go “Oh, that looks great, that’s a great practical” and be fooled if they hadn’t seen so much actual practical beforehand. If you’re not sure what the effect is, practical or not, if you can’t really tell. But we are going to seek to incorporate elements that are practical in there as well and I think that sleight of hand was what helped sell the reality of IRON MAN. He’s also in the air and you have to find the right animators and tune that in right so that you believe it. What I don’t want to do is tie myself to too much practical stuff that it makes the action not dynamic enough and the difficulty with IRON MAN isn’t he’s not ROBOCOP he doesn’t just walk on the ground. I found myself giving notes on shots that weren’t digital to the vendors. But having seen Iron Man flying in the dogfight sequence in daylight, the way ILM delivered it, it really made me… if you get the animation right, and you’re dealing with non-organic characters, it really has hit a level where if you don’t ask too much of the camera and too much of the actual choreography and you keep that within the realm of reality it’s actually very, very difficult to tell. Part of why I want to do it this way is because if we could dial into the action early enough it will give us a lot more time to refine things and a lot more time to integrate it well. And I think that the attention to detail can never be… you can never bypass that stage. Jon Favreau: It’s amazing how much of the stuff was replaced. CLICK HERE FOR PART ONE OF QUINT’S INTERVIEW WITH JON FAVREAU, COVERING GENNDY TARTAKOVSKY’S INVOLVEMENT IN IRON MAN 2, TIDBITS ON AVATAR AND FAVREAU’S OPINION ON NEXT GENERATION MEDIA! Quint: Do you think there’s a danger of jumping too digital too early? Because I think one of the things that a lot of at least movie fans kind of grabbed onto was the fact that you blended Stan Winston’s suit with CGI, that the suit had weight to it.