No Edward Norton for The Avengers

[exodus]

IMO Joss needs to add a little more maturity to his scripts & Norton can bring that. I feel Joss writes many of his adults characters as if they aren't mentally over 25 years old. I find them very aloof and unidentifable. A large part of the audience that grew up reading The Avengers are now 40 -50 years old, that outside Whedon's usual targeted audience. I haven't seen anything he's done yet that grabs that crowd. .

Just for the record, I'm over fifty and started reading the Avengers about the time the Vision first appeared, before the first Kree-Skrull War, and I love Whedon's stuff. Other people's dialogue often seems dull and stuffy by comparison.

And, honestly, most of the hardcore BUFFY and FIREFLY fans I know have kids and mortgages, so it's not like he only appeals to kids . . . not that there's anything wrong with that!

I know plenty of folks in their late 20's & 30's that have kids and pay a mortgage too. Mostly the hardcore fans are the one tuning into Whedon's stuff. He's going to need to do better than he's done with Serenity & Dollhouse to capture a audience to make Avengers the hit Marvel wants.

 

[Greg Cox]

IMO Joss needs to add a little more maturity to his scripts & Norton can bring that. I feel Joss writes many of his adults characters as if they aren't mentally over 25 years old. I find them very aloof and unidentifable. A large part of the audience that grew up reading The Avengers are now 40 -50 years old, that outside Whedon's usual targeted audience. I haven't seen anything he's done yet that grabs that crowd. .

Just for the record, I'm over fifty and started reading the Avengers about the time the Vision first appeared, before the first Kree-Skrull War, and I love Whedon's stuff. Other people's dialogue often seems dull and stuffy by comparison.

And, honestly, most of the hardcore BUFFY and FIREFLY fans I know have kids and mortgages, so it's not like he only appeals to kids . . . not that there's anything wrong with that!

I know plenty of folks in their late 20's & 30's that have kids and pay a mortgage too. Mostly the hardcore fans are the one tuning into Whedon's stuff. He's going to need to do better than he's done with Serenity & Dollhouse to capture a audience to make Avengers the hit Marvel wants.

Oh, I agree that you need more than hardcore Whedon fans to make THE AVENGERS a success. I was just questioning the notion that his work doesn't appeal to us old folks. Lord knows there are plenty of Whedon fans among my contemporaries . . . .

 

[RookieBatman]

We also wouldn't get Samual Jackson in Iron -Man 2 saying such dumb lines as: "The brotha' just walked in and stole your suit?" Since when does Nick Fury talk like Luke Cage?

I just figured they were trying to make Fury sound more like the stereotypical Samuel L. Jackson image. Not saying that isn't a mistake too, but he may have actually been going for that.

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

According to Nikki Finke at Deadline Hollywood, Marvel is in late-stage talks with Mark Ruffalo to play the Hulk in The Avengers.

 

[SinglePurpose]

IMO Joss needs to add a little more maturity to his scripts & Norton can bring that. I feel Joss writes many of his adults characters as if they aren't mentally over 25 years old. I find them very aloof and unidentifable. A large part of the audience that grew up reading The Avengers are now 40 -50 years old, that outside Whedon's usual targeted audience. I haven't seen anything he's done yet that grabs that crowd. .

Just for the record, I'm over fifty and started reading the Avengers about the time the Vision first appeared, before the first Kree-Skrull War, and I love Whedon's stuff. Other people's dialogue often seems dull and stuffy by comparison.

And, honestly, most of the hardcore BUFFY and FIREFLY fans I know have kids and mortgages, so it's not like he only appeals to kids . . . not that there's anything wrong with that!

I know plenty of folks in their late 20's & 30's that have kids and pay a mortgage too. Mostly the hardcore fans are the one tuning into Whedon's stuff. He's going to need to do better than he's done with Serenity & Dollhouse to capture a audience to make Avengers the hit Marvel wants.

A) I agree that it's mostly hardcore fans that watch Whedon's stuff but I don't think that's super important. The Avengers is going to appeal to more than just Whedon's core audience. Marvel isn't going to market it to Joss Whedon's fans anymore than Iron Man was marketed to fans of Elf. They're going to market it as a team up of their existing superheroes.
B) It doesn't matter if The Avengers appeals to people in their 40-50s who grew up reading The Avengers. Hollywood blockbusters are marketed to people under 35. It's not like Batman Begins was targeted to people in their 60s just because Batman was created in 1939.

 

[exodus]

Just for the record, I'm over fifty and started reading the Avengers about the time the Vision first appeared, before the first Kree-Skrull War, and I love Whedon's stuff. Other people's dialogue often seems dull and stuffy by comparison.

And, honestly, most of the hardcore BUFFY and FIREFLY fans I know have kids and mortgages, so it's not like he only appeals to kids . . . not that there's anything wrong with that!

I know plenty of folks in their late 20's & 30's that have kids and pay a mortgage too. Mostly the hardcore fans are the one tuning into Whedon's stuff. He's going to need to do better than he's done with Serenity & Dollhouse to capture a audience to make Avengers the hit Marvel wants.

A) I agree that it's mostly hardcore fans that watch Whedon's stuff but I don't think that's super important. The Avengers is going to appeal to more than just Whedon's core audience. Marvel isn't going to market it to Joss Whedon's fans anymore than Iron Man was marketed to fans of Elf. They're going to market it as a team up of their existing superheroes.
B) It doesn't matter if The Avengers appeals to people in their 40-50s who grew up reading The Avengers. Hollywood blockbusters are marketed to people under 35. It's not like Batman Begins was targeted to people in their 60s just because Batman was created in 1939.

This wasn't even the point I was making because you're only going by one quarter of the replies I made.
I didn't say anything about marketing, I'm talking about Whedon's writing style nor did I say the Avergers appeals to people 40-50's. I said the folks that started reading Avengers from the start are now 40-50. I did also say Whedons writing style needs to be more mature for that part of the audience because my original statement was, Whedon writes his adult characters as if they aren't mentally over 25 years old.

 

[Greg Cox]

This wasn't even the point I was making because you're only going by one quarter of the replies I made.
I didn't say anything about marketing, I'm talking about Whedon's writing style nor did I say the Avergers appeals to people 40-50's. I said the folks that started reading Avengers from the start are now 40-50. I did also say Whedons writing style needs to be more mature for that part of the audience because my original statement was, Whedon writes his adult characters as if they aren't mentally over 25 years old.

But, again, my argument is that my contemporaries and I are exactly the "part of the audience" you're talking about: middle-aged comic book fans who started reading the Avengers way back when--and I've never found Whedon's writing to be too immature for my taste.

We can disagree on Whedon's writing, but I really don't think it's a generational thing. I've never known any middle-aged BUFFY or FIREFLY fans to be turned off by his show because the characters felt too immature . . . .

I know way too many fifty-year-old fans who can quote BUFFY chapter and verse!

 

[coolghoul]

We also wouldn't get Samual Jackson in Iron -Man 2 saying such dumb lines as: "The brotha' just walked in and stole your suit?" Since when does Nick Fury talk like Luke Cage?

I just figured they were trying to make Fury sound more like the stereotypical Samuel L. Jackson image. Not saying that isn't a mistake too, but he may have actually been going for that.

The Samuel Jackson version of Nick Fury was first seen in Marvel's Ultimate Universe. It's just a mix and match where they took a Ultimate Universe character and put them with the normal 616-Herc.

Is it such a big deal?

(As compared to (say) Catwoman even tho' it was Halle Berry in that dress!)

 

[Obiwanshinobi]

hmm Mark Ruffalo eh?

 

[exodus]

This wasn't even the point I was making because you're only going by one quarter of the replies I made.
I didn't say anything about marketing, I'm talking about Whedon's writing style nor did I say the Avergers appeals to people 40-50's. I said the folks that started reading Avengers from the start are now 40-50. I did also say Whedons writing style needs to be more mature for that part of the audience because my original statement was, Whedon writes his adult characters as if they aren't mentally over 25 years old.

But, again, my argument is that my contemporaries and I are exactly the "part of the audience" you're talking about: middle-aged comic book fans who started reading the Avengers way back when--and I've never found Whedon's writing to be too immature for my taste.

I'm in your age group and what might not be seen as immatute to you, is too me. So all it is, is a representation of both sides.

So now you do know someone that is turned off by it.
Saying you know fifty year olds that can quote Buffy but I don't, just means we both travel in different circles of people we associate with. Now if we were to do an on the street poll of the non-bias......

 

[Greg Cox]

But, again, my argument is that my contemporaries and I are exactly the "part of the audience" you're talking about: middle-aged comic book fans who started reading the Avengers way back when--and I've never found Whedon's writing to be too immature for my taste.

I'm in your age group and what might not be seen as immatute to you, is too me. So all it is, is a representation of both sides.

So now you do know someone that is turn off by it.[/QUOTE]

Which is cool. I was just questioning the generalization that Whedon's work doesn't appeal to older Avengers fans.

Not that we're really the target audience for this movie anyway!

 

[USS Mariner]

I'm glad Norton is out. He's a little prima donna bitch anyway. He's always coming onto movies and tossing out the script and throwing little hissies if he doesn't get his way. Can anyone imagine him coming in and demanding he get to rewrite a Joss Whedon script? I can imagine Joss and Edward clawing each others eyes out over the whole affair. Better they get rid of ratface before his massive ego causes the Marvel universe to implode.

Edward Norton, as seen through the eyes of Admiral James Kirk:

 

[SinglePurpose]

This wasn't even the point I was making because you're only going by one quarter of the replies I made.
I didn't say anything about marketing, I'm talking about Whedon's writing style nor did I say the Avergers appeals to people 40-50's. I said the folks that started reading Avengers from the start are now 40-50. I did also say Whedons writing style needs to be more mature for that part of the audience because my original statement was, Whedon writes his adult characters as if they aren't mentally over 25 years old.

I got what you were saying. My point was that Whedon doesn't "need" to appeal to the 40-50 year old audience because that isn't the audience that Marvel is going after.

Also, I don't think Whedon's writing style is immature but that's neither here nor there.

 

[exodus]

We also wouldn't get Samual Jackson in Iron -Man 2 saying such dumb lines as: "The brotha' just walked in and stole your suit?" Since when does Nick Fury talk like Luke Cage?

I just figured they were trying to make Fury sound more like the stereotypical Samuel L. Jackson image. Not saying that isn't a mistake too, but he may have actually been going for that.

The Samuel Jackson version of Nick Fury was first seen in Marvel's Ultimate Universe. It's just a mix and match where they took a Ultimate Universe character and put them with the normal 616-Herc.

Is it such a big deal?

(As compared to (say) Catwoman even tho' it was Halle Berry in that dress!)

That wasn't the point, it was how he spoke.
As I said, I didn't invision Nick Fury talking like Luke Cage.

 

[exodus]

This wasn't even the point I was making because you're only going by one quarter of the replies I made.
I didn't say anything about marketing, I'm talking about Whedon's writing style nor did I say the Avergers appeals to people 40-50's. I said the folks that started reading Avengers from the start are now 40-50. I did also say Whedons writing style needs to be more mature for that part of the audience because my original statement was, Whedon writes his adult characters as if they aren't mentally over 25 years old.

I got what you were saying. My point was that Whedon doesn't "need" to appeal to the 40-50 year old audience because that isn't the audience that Marvel is going after.

Sure they are.
If Marvel is looking for it to be a blockbuster, their looking for it to appeal to everyone 13 and up. The more it appeals to, the more butts fill the seats to make the film money. They also hope for repeat viewings by the audience. From 13 to 60, all our dollars count. That's what made Spidey, X-Men & Iron-Man huge hits, they captured an audience of many ages.

 

[Admiral_Young]

So Mark Ruffalo is apparently in final stage talks with Marvel to play Bruce Banner. Before that hit...David Tennant was in running for the role as well. I would have preferred David over Mark but really I don't see neither as Banner.

 

[JacksonArcher]

I don't see Ruffalo being any better than Norton.

 

[Gaith]

According to Nikki Finke at Deadline Hollywood, Marvel is in late-stage talks with Mark Ruffalo to play the Hulk in The Avengers.

I initially read this as Mark Whalberg, due to seeing him on a large bus poster this morning, and thus tried to block the idea from my mind!

Ruffalo's a terrific actor, with a very likable screen presence (maybe even too likable) but he's not exactly lanky, is he? He's normally proportioned. And one great thing about Norton was the contrast between the thin, frail-looking Banner and the Hulk. So, they could do a lot worse than Ruffalo, but my vote's still for Nick Stahl.

 

[Peter the Younger]

According to Nikki Finke at Deadline Hollywood, Marvel is in late-stage talks with Mark Ruffalo to play the Hulk in The Avengers.

I initially read this as Mark Whalberg, due to seeing him on a large bus poster this morning, and thus tried to block the idea from my mind!

Ruffalo's a terrific actor, with a very likable screen presence (maybe even too likable) but he's not exactly lanky, is he? He's normally proportioned. And one great thing about Norton was the contrast between the thin, frail-looking Banner and the Hulk. So, they could do a lot worse than Ruffalo, but my vote's still for Nick Stahl.

Agreed, Ruffalo just doesn't have the right body type for Banner. Stahl would be much better, but I'd much prefer all parties swallowed their egos and Norton got back on board.

Sounds like Marvel and Norton's agent got into a game of chicken that went too far.

 

[Anwar]

I'd have liked Sharlto Copley as the next Banner.