Ah. That explains it. Whereas I am old enough to remember reading the original 12-cent comics, where Jane was clearly a brunet.
No Edward Norton for The Avengers
- Thread starter Dream
- Start date
Ah. That explains it. Whereas I am old enough to remember reading the original 12-cent comics, where Jane was clearly a brunet.
Us young'ins gotta do what we can to catch up.
One thing that did bug me about TIH is that the Hulk model looked nothing like Norton, and I would have been satisfied if they'd have just added his mole to the model.
As much as this sounds like whining, this doesn't really bode well for the Avengers team up if they're going to jettison a main fucking character in the Marvel universe (like it or not, recasting Rhodey isn't that big of a deal, given that he is a supporting character). Add to the fact that Norton's input (like him or not) and work did leave a personal mark on this version of the Hulk, which, thanks to the appearance of RDJ, is already canon in the current movie universe.
As for Norton's possible ego in regards to his role in The Avengers? Well, none of us can actually say, even given the problems surrounding his other films (like American History X), because we have no idea what the script (which I'm sure they don't even have yet) or outline looks like. He may have tried to correct or advise on his own character (or even other characters or their relations to the Hulk); he may have been a complete bitch about the whole thing.
We don't know. Again, my biggest concern in this story is that they replaced a main character this early in development. Bad precedent.
As much as this sounds like whining, this doesn't really bode well for the Avengers team up if they're going to jettison a main fucking character in the Marvel universe (like it or not, recasting Rhodey isn't that big of a deal, given that he is a supporting character). Add to the fact that Norton's input (like him or not) and work did leave a personal mark on this version of the Hulk, which, thanks to the appearance of RDJ, is already canon in the current movie universe.
As for Norton's possible ego in regards to his role in The Avengers? Well, none of us can actually say, even given the problems surrounding his other films (like American History X), because we have no idea what the script (which I'm sure they don't even have yet) or outline looks like. He may have tried to correct or advise on his own character (or even other characters or their relations to the Hulk); he may have been a complete bitch about the whole thing.
We don't know. Again, my biggest concern in this story is that they replaced a main character this early in development. Bad precedent.
I doubt it. We've already had three Banners, counting Bruce Bixby. Why not a fourth?
It's not going to affect the story any.
Besides, I don't remember them trimming Catwoman's role in the old BATMAN movie just because Lee Meriwether had to replace Julie Newmar . . . .
I'm sorry that Norton won't be back, because he's a great actor and also for the sake of continuity.
But you know, part of me admires Marvel for eschewing the usual Hollywood 'we had a great time with Ed but the time was right for a new Bruce Banner yadayadayada.' Standard bullshit. Instead, their attitude seems to be 'we're the new production company in town, we're not doing things the Hollywood way, if an actor dicks us around, he can f*ck off.
No-one is indispensable, seems to be their motto. Now, admittedly, I think they'd have a problem replacing Robert Downey Jr, but then again, The Incredible Hulk (which I enjoyed) didn't exactly do Iron Man-type business, so I suppose they'd rather take the flak from fans for now and trust us to turn up to see the movie anyway. Which seems to be what most of us are going to do.
Norton is a great actor but he has form for being difficult - American History X and The Italian Job come to mind. I'm sure Marvel are no saints either, but I can imagine that with an ensemble cast, a movie that is crucial to the future of the Marvel movie-verse and a talented director who is nonetheless a newbie to a project of this scale, they just didn't want to take risks on him kicking off.
I want Kiefer Sutherland as Banner. Imagine him saying 'Don't make me angry. You won't like me when I'm angry.' And he's done the fugitive-thing very well on 24. While most recently known for Jack Bauer, he does project intelligence and I think could convincingly portray a scientist.
But you know, part of me admires Marvel for eschewing the usual Hollywood 'we had a great time with Ed but the time was right for a new Bruce Banner yadayadayada.' Standard bullshit. Instead, their attitude seems to be 'we're the new production company in town, we're not doing things the Hollywood way, if an actor dicks us around, he can f*ck off.
No-one is indispensable, seems to be their motto. Now, admittedly, I think they'd have a problem replacing Robert Downey Jr, but then again, The Incredible Hulk (which I enjoyed) didn't exactly do Iron Man-type business, so I suppose they'd rather take the flak from fans for now and trust us to turn up to see the movie anyway. Which seems to be what most of us are going to do.
Norton is a great actor but he has form for being difficult - American History X and The Italian Job come to mind. I'm sure Marvel are no saints either, but I can imagine that with an ensemble cast, a movie that is crucial to the future of the Marvel movie-verse and a talented director who is nonetheless a newbie to a project of this scale, they just didn't want to take risks on him kicking off.
I want Kiefer Sutherland as Banner. Imagine him saying 'Don't make me angry. You won't like me when I'm angry.' And he's done the fugitive-thing very well on 24. While most recently known for Jack Bauer, he does project intelligence and I think could convincingly portray a scientist.
Well, to be fair, the HULK as drawn in the comics looking nothing like Bruce Banner either in all honesty. The one thing I would have liked to see in BOTH films was a return to the ORIGINAL HULK (ie a character with a distibct 'Hyde' type personality - which was self aware, VERY intelligent in that it was distinct from Banner's; knew it 'turned into/bacame itself from Banner; and did all it could to mainain it's 'dominance' and keep Banner from finding a cure).
In the original/early Hulk comics; Bammer turned into the Hulk when the sun set, and reverted to Banner opon sunrise. To keep Banner contained; the Hulk would either drink himself into an aschhlic stupor just before the change (so Banner stayed passed out all day); or would leap to a high mountain ledge; opr other area he knew Banner would be able to climb down from before nightfall, etc.
I've always been anoyed that all the TV series have been the unintelligent/simple-minded Hulk, that can either barely speak, or not speak at all.
I don't remember this from the original comics. Are you sure that wasn't another series set at that time in Hulk's history? (I don't think drinking himself into a stupor would pass the Comics Code.)
A decade or two ago, he would have made an interesting Banner.
So, no news or anything, huh?
We'll probably get news out of the SDCC this weekend.
All those things come from the early issues of Peter David's classic run on The Incredible Hulk, when the Hulk had returned to his original grey colour (and crafty, intelligent personality). Those issues are great.
True - but a lot of that was taken from some of the early Astonishing Tales Hulk stories of the early 1960ies. I think by the time the Hulk title hit the scene; they had already started the 'simple-minded, innocent giant style Hulk - and Banner changing when angry/Changing back after calming down, etc.' paradigm
Looks like they nabbed Jonah Hill as Norton's replacement!