• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

No Edward Norton for The Avengers

Saul said:
Well he is right, there was no need for Marvel to make a statement such as that. Just saying they wanted to go in a different direction is enough but what they said is adding salt to the wounds and puts the film in a bad light. If the rest of the cast go to comic con now the whole thing will be overshadowed by this.
Click to expand...

I agree. From Norton's agent, it appears the entire thing WAS monetarily motivated, which seems about right when you take into account Marvel's track record dealing with actors before (Mickey Rourke, Samuel L. Jackson, Terrence Howard, etc).

It's such a shame. It would have been awesome to see Norton reprise his role. Marvel's stupid cost-conscious attitude is really going to start hurting them if they keep this up.
 
It's really dumb of Feige to open up this war of words. It's bad PR for Marvel and for the film, it places others involved in the film (Whedon, RDJ, etc) in a potentially tough spot since they'll have to answer questions about this, and it compounds Marvel's growing reputation for treating the talent poorly. Now some stars may look at Marvel and think, "If I make a movie for them not only are they going to try to lowball me in terms of salary, but they might even try to publicly humiliate me down the line if we get into some arguments."
 
The odds are that Hulk will only have, at most, 20 minutes of screentime in The Avengers, and most of it will be in his CG from, as opposed to actually being Banner. If Norton was demanding the same -- or greater -- pay that he got on The Incredible Hulk, given his well-known reputation for being an utter dick on his sets, I can't say I'm totally shocked at all this, though Feige is not exactly acting like a gentleman in this divorce.
 
Could you imagine if at Comicon Marvel announced the hiring of Norton and the firing of Feige? Won't happen though.

I guess the only positive thing you can say about this is that... at least Feige doesn't have to answer to the Weinsteins, otherwise you'd never see the Marvel movies you want to. :)
 
I can't believe they go to all this trouble in creating a universe, and then blow it.

If you're not gonna' have the same actors, what's the point?

Fuck you, Feige.
 
Well, maybe at the presentation at Comiccon, someone will take Feige to task about this whole situation.
 
JacksonArcher said:
From Norton's agent, it appears the entire thing WAS monetarily motivated, which seems about right when you take into account Marvel's track record dealing with actors before (Mickey Rourke, Samuel L. Jackson, Terrence Howard, etc).
Click to expand...
It's certainly in Camp Norton's interest to say so, which of course doesn't mean it isn't true. But as previously noted, will Marvel really lose any ticket sales by not paying Norton to return? Doubtful, whereas they needed Rourke and Jackson (but not Howard).


Edit: The LA Times weighs in:

Marvel fires Ed Norton -- maybe they don't like him when he's angry

The Hulk has some fairly obvious anger issues and, let's face it, he's not exactly a team player. The same might be said of Edward Norton, the two-time Oscar nominee whose talent and temperament are often mentioned in the same breath by Hollywood insiders. "Sure, Ed Norton is a great actor, but...."

...

Feige, maybe the most earnest and easygoing executive I've ever met in Hollywood, slapped down the HitFix notion that this was a money-based move and that that there might be room for negotiation.

...

So this will probably play out a lot like the replacement of Terrence Howard, who was reportedly the highest-paid actor in the "Iron Man" cast and then was shown the door and replaced by Cheadle. Howard got that high pay because he was the first one signed to the project, it was the first Marvel Studios production and Downey's career was still in bounce-back mode. He got replaced in part because he didn't want to renegotiate, and that became the Hollywood headline, making it seem like a money matter.

Marvel Studios, which delivered its first movie in 2008, is already pretty infamous for its penny-pinching, but according to insiders, Howard really got kicked out of the franchise because he was viewed as a problem child by the "Iron Man" team and the studio leadership. And, yes, there may be a trend here. It seems to me that Marvel is now like a pro sports team with a salary cap and a low tolerance for troublemakers -- and an even lower tolerance for expensive troublemakers.

... Good luck trying to unravel the hard truth in all of this.

What's next? Well, no one seemed to mind that Cheadle stepped in as Tony Stark's best pal in "Iron Man 2," and I can't see a fan revolt over Norton's exile. Right now, to be savagely honest, there is one and only one irreplacable person in the Hollywood life of Marvel: Downey. An Avengers movie with someone other than Downey in the metal suit won't fly, but don't expect picket signs for Norton.

Feige really couldn't bring in a total unknown to play Banner because the movie already has an unproved lead in Hemsworth (best known, to date, as Captain Kirk's doomed father in the short opening sequence of the "Star Trek" reboot) and a still-unproved commodity in Evans. Tapping a fresh-face actor to play Banner would be cheaper, sure, but the new guy might get gobbled up in shared scenes with big-charisma personalities like Downey and Jackson or real-deal, serious actors like Renner and Cheadle.
Click to expand...
It really does sound like a money thing to me. Norton does lots of indies for pennies, so if he does a tentpole picture, it'd make sense for him to require a tentpole salary, which Marvel doesn't need to fork over. Maybe the biggest casualty here is an Incredible Hulk 2, but that never sounded all that likely to begin with.

Geoff Boucher, the above post's author, suggested Adrien Body and a few others for the Banner part, but they were pretty awful choices, IMHO. (Lex Luthor? Qui-Gon? Wtf?)

I still say Nick Stahl. If Banner only appears for a few scenes, as an unwilling adversary, he'll need to look haunted, and Stahl plays haunted about as well as Norton, or anyone else.
 
Last edited:
If Marvel is a sports team, than Feige is either Al Davis or Daniel Synder (in terms of ego and mentality; spending-wise I guess they want to be the Royals and not the Red Sox). Howard and Norton are "troublemakers" because they didn't bend over for him.
 
This sucks..Norton is known as a difficult actor but he was trying to be a team player this time so it's a shame there treating him like this...I wonder what else the PTB are planning to screw the Avengers movie up?:rolleyes:
 
Out Of My Vulcan Mind said:
Wow, Marvel's statement is a pretty big "fuck you" to Ed Norton. These things are usually handed with more finesse, at least in PR terms.
Click to expand...

It just looks like egos got bruised on both sides. Ed Norton probably read the script, didn't like parts of it relating to his role/part/character in the script; made a stink asking for major re-writes; marvel production said, "No." - Norton said, "Bye."

happens all the time. hell, for all we know it migh be a decent script overall, and Nortons complaint is - "That's all Bruice Banner has? the rest is the CGI Hulk? Why do I even need to come to the set?"

OR

It could be a bad script.

Guess we won't know until production starts at the earliest; or when the movie hits theatres at the latest.
 
Okay, Warner Bros. and DC, now's your chance to sign Norton to a multi-picture deal to play a superhero or cast him as Riddler. Edward Norton for Flash!! :p
 
Noname Given said:
Out Of My Vulcan Mind said:
Wow, Marvel's statement is a pretty big "fuck you" to Ed Norton. These things are usually handed with more finesse, at least in PR terms.
Click to expand...

It just looks like egos got bruised on both sides. Ed Norton probably read the script, didn't like parts of it relating to his role/part/character in the script; made a stink asking for major re-writes; marvel production said, "No." - Norton said, "Bye."

happens all the time. hell, for all we know it migh be a decent script overall, and Nortons complaint is - "That's all Bruice Banner has? the rest is the CGI Hulk? Why do I even need to come to the set?"

OR

It could be a bad script.

Guess we won't know until production starts at the earliest; or when the movie hits theatres at the latest.
Click to expand...

^^ See this is why Marvel made the offensive press release. Now everyone assumes it was somehow Nortons fault that it didn't work out. Wonderful PR by Marvel there, they make a stupid decision and everyone lumps the blame onto the actor.
 
^^ In Disney's defense, Norton's repeated insistence on graphic Hulk-The Thing sex scenes would probably have pushed The Avengers into an R-rating, particularly when the former's gamma radiation cause him to [censored]...

:p
 
If Norton was demanding a bigger role or insisting on rewrites, then I can see why Marvel got sick of him.

While sometimes it's beneficial to have an actor who likes to branch out and put his hands into other aspects of the production, on some films you really just want actors who will shut up and do their jobs and leave the writing, directing, editing, etc. to the appropriate personnel.

I still like Norton, but it would not surprise me at all if he was seeking a disproportionate level of influence over the movie and that's why they sacked him.
 
http://chud.com/articles/articles/24388/1/WILL-THE-NEW-HULK-RISE-LIKE-A-PHOENIX/Page1.html

WILL THE NEW HULK RISE LIKE A PHOENIX?
By Devin Faraci Published Today News



It broke Friday that Marvel was officially parting ways with Ed Norton. No more would the prickly, difficult actor be playing the role of Bruce Banner in any future Marvel film, including The Avengers. Over the weekend the war of words escalated, with Marvel Studios honcho Kevin Feige issuing some choice statements about the actor, and his agent rebutting (head to HitFix for all the details on that battle). So there won't be an Ed Norton in The Avengers, but who could be joining the team?

Reliable sources tell me that Marvel has already put out an offer, and the actor they've spoken to is Joaquin Phoenix, believe it or not. Phoenix is taking time to mull over the offer and the bigger implications - Marvel may yet resurrect the Hulk franchise - but Marvel hopes to have him in place by Comic Con, which is when they want to announce their new Bruce Banner.

As of right now treat this as a rumor, as I was unable to get solid confirmations or denials (it's the weekend!). Phoenix might very well turn the studio down - I'm hearing that whoever plays Banner will be the lowest man on The Avengers pay totem pole - but this would probably be a good move for the actor. Phoenix needs to come back from the wilderness, where he has firmly planted himself since he made a weird, probably put-on documentary with Casey Affleck. Over the last year or so Phoenix has seemingly melted down, becoming a terrible rapper, an inveterate drug abuser and a complete train wreck, leading up to his supposed retirement from Hollywood. That may have all been for the documentary (which has been screening for potential buyers), so getting back in the saddle immediately, now that the doc is done and on the market, makes sense for him.

But does he make sense for Marvel? If Feige is moving past Ed Norton because he's tough to work with, will he have better luck with Phoenix? This isn't the first time Marvel has had this problem - part of the reason why Terrence Howard didn't come back for Iron Man 2 is because he wasn't the most pleasant dude in the cast. And Iron Man 2 itself had some legendary on-set moments with Mickey Rourke that will one day be incredible book fodder. But that's what happens in a company that lives in a post-Robert Downey Jr moment, where they think they can tame the wildest horse.

If Phoenix doesn't take the part, Marvel will quickly go to someone else. The reason why they haven't officially announced Joss Whedon for The Avengers is probably because it's going to be a big part of their presentation at Comic Con, and they're going to want to present the full team if at all possible.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top