(Brief) comment from Bana on role

[donners22]

ERIC Bana was waiting for the offer, but it never came. So he's going to have to watch anticipated true crime drama Underbelly, starring his mate Vince Colosimo, with the rest of Melbourne.



"Would have been fun, no doubt, but I did not get approached," he said yesterday.



"Can't wait to see it. In fact, when all that stuff went down, I thought to myself, God, someone would have balls to put this on film, then to see it get made, it's great.


"I used to tell people overseas about what was going on here and they couldn't believe it. Vince is one of my favourites so I can't wait. I love Vince."


In an interview to discuss the March release of his latest film The Other Boleyn Girl with Natalie Portman and Scarlett Johansson, Bana was also anticipating his next job, playing the villain Nero in the new Star Trek movie for Lost creator and Cloverfield producer J.J. Abrams.


He described the role as a cameo. "It's just a great character, it's J.J. Abrams. It's a really well-written script, great part. Couldn't say no. I don't actually look at the size of parts ever."


Bana has been living in his Melbourne home since December, after finishing the Toronto shoot of The Time Traveller's Wife.


In his garage is the sad wreck of his 1974 XB Ford coupe, which he crashed in the Targa Tasmania rally last April, waiting for Bana to have the time to work on it.


"It's metal so there's no such thing as a write-off," he said. "It's a term that insurance companies use, not optimistic rev-heads."


Bana said he was so shocked at the death of Heath Ledger "it didn't even sink in for the first three days".


He didn't know Ledger well, but the pair encountered each other when Ledger's Brokeback Mountain and Bana's Munich were both nominated for various awards.


"The overwhelming thing for me was I then really considered his age and thought to myself, 'wow, he's 10 years younger than me' and I think of all the things that I've experienced as a person in the last 10 years and what he had to look forward to that he's now been robbed of."

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23159453-2862,00.html

 

[Arlo]

Hmm, that's the first I've seen this role referred to as a cameo. Interesting.

 

[donners22]

Presumably it will be some sort of shadowy, mysterious character who only has a confrontation at the end. Good to see he is happy about it, though.

 

[Good Will Riker]

^^^

It sounds more like the writer of this article is putting words in Eric Bana's mouth.

Remember, F. Murrary Abraham's role was marginal in Star Trek: Insurrection, yet he was billed as the main villain. I would not exactly call it a "cameo," but appearing at a critical time within the film which may be overall a shorter duration compared to the epic scope of this film. But, appearing at a critical time is the key to being considered a major villain in this film.

And, from the sound of Bana's validation of the script, this sounds like it is going to be a good film. Besides, he did this because it actually was a good script, as opposed to him just saying "YES" to HULK just to work with Ang Lee, regardless of the quality of that script, which was not all that bad, just not superhero film material.

 

[Ovation]

Anthony Hopkins won an Oscar for playing Hannibal Lector (and not a supporting role either) and he was on screen for fewer than 20 mins (more like 15 or so, IIRC). I'm not suggesting that Bana will win an Oscar, but there are many films where a limited screen time does not preclude--indeed, may enhance--the role from being important and having a significant impact on the story. One need only think of Glengarry Glen Ross and Alec Baldwin's ESSENTIAL 5 mins in that film (I know that role wasn't in the original play, but after having watched the film 8 or 9 times over the years, I cannot imagine the story without that scene).

 

[Cary L. Brown]

Arlo said:Hmm, that's the first I've seen this role referred to as a cameo. Interesting.

Which actually lends credence, in my mind, to the idea that this character isn't "the villain" at all (which I espoused months ago and was roundly lambasted over).

I suggested, at the time, that Bana was certainly playing a ROMULAN, which resulted in people ASSUMING that he was a villain. However, I suggested that Bana's character might in fact be the first Romulan officer in Starfleet to attend the Command Course (and thus would be the person his mentor, Spock, was relating the story of Jim Kirk to).

The idea that "the villain" would be a CAMEO is... well, just unheard of, really. It's POSSIBLE to do it, but I can't recall having seen that done.

And this bit about it being a "cameo" seems to be coming from Bana himself, doesn't it? You'd assume he'd know... particularly since principal photography should be a bit more than 1/2 through already.

 

[Arlo]

^ I MUCH prefer that scenario to some evil time-hopping Romulan bent on changing history. We got enough of that nonsense in Enterprise.

 

[archeryguy1701]

I thought it has been established somewhere that he is in fact the villian?

 

[Dark Gilligan]

archeryguy1701 said:
I thought it has been established somewhere that he is in fact the villian?

Perhaps Nero is the mastermind behind the Romulan plot but not the one who actually carries it out. That would give more on-screen time to the assassins and keep Nero's role relatively small.

 

[Sharr Khan]

donners22 said:
Presumably it will be some sort of shadowy, mysterious character who only has a confrontation at the end. Good to see he is happy about it, though.

"Future Guy" LOL

Sharr

 

[Harvey]

Since Bana has "with" billing in the credits, his appearance may be relatively brief, but a doubt it will be insignificant. And I can live with that.

 

[Kegek]

Good Will Riker said:
Remember, F. Murrary Abraham's role was marginal in Star Trek: Insurrection, yet he was billed as the main villain.

And let's not forget Ricardo Montalban as Khan. He doesn't actually get that much screentime.

Anyway, this, I guess, raises questions about Clifton Collins Jr. as Ayel. If Nero is the main heavy but in a relatively smaller role, does that mean Collins gets to do more of the bad guy legwork?

 

[Delta1]

^^^
No one would accuse Ruafo, Khan, or Hannibal Lecter of being cameos. They all had many scenes on at least two sets. Though I'm not really sure Bana was describing a cameo--that word comes from the Herald Sun writer, not a direct quote.

Offhand, I can think of a few villains that only appeared in one scene, but they weren't prominent actors, so I don't think they'd be considered cameo roles.

 

[Holytomato]

So, Nero is a cameo role. Cool!

No time travellin Romulan bent on changing the future. :thumbsup:

 

[Arlo]

Well regardless of how Bana characterizes it, it's not *really* a cameo if he's in the credits...

 

[debush24]

True,think it will be like leeson in begins,presence felt thru out

 

[Arlo]

Ras Al Gul, his arms wide?

 

[debush24]

He will be cool,Eric does great roles like chopper!

 

[StarMan]

Arlo said:
Ras Al Gul, his arms wide?

Ex-ack-ery.

 

[StarMan]

debush24 said:
He will be cool,Eric does great roles like chopper!

Spaces after punctuations would also be cool.

I'm not trying to be nasty, but it *would* make your posts easier to read. Trust me, the easier a post is to read, the more likely it is someone will take the time to read it.

And Chopper was a great role.