There was no comment from Marvel about the switcheroo, but apparently there were sources who said money was one of the reasons they were unable to seal the deal with Howard. The change may be jarring to some fans, but it may end up working out well for Marvel. According to the report, the studio had been aiming to work with Cheadle for some time, and Howard's ouster finally gives them that chance.

The slightly worrisome part is where Marvel is described as wanting to "take the role in another direction." Does it mean they wanted someone with a few more years on him? Is it as simple as just wanting to go in a non-Terrence Howard direction? What were the other, non-financial reasons the negotiations fell through? I'm glad they didn't just axe the character, because Jim Rhodes has huge potential. His relationships with Tony Stark and the suits of armor are complex. It's just hard not to be a little antsy about possible changes, even with the success of the first film and Jon Favreau returning to helm.