SuaveStar Posted June 4, 2010 Report Share Posted June 4, 2010 Dammit. Fanboys want Nathan Fillion for everything. Fixed. True. I want Fillion in a live action Wonder Woman film, and not even as Steve Trevor. He's make an awesome Diana and Hippolyta. Fixed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightWing Posted June 4, 2010 Report Share Posted June 4, 2010 I want a Wonder Woman film where every role is played by Nathan Fillion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShaunKL Posted June 17, 2010 Report Share Posted June 17, 2010 I want a Wonder Woman film where every role is played by Nathan Fillion. I want Nathan Fillion to make a Wonder Woman movie, by himself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delete Posted July 10, 2010 Report Share Posted July 10, 2010 Bruce Banner to be recast http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/103715-no-edward-norton-for-the-avengers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavros Posted July 10, 2010 Report Share Posted July 10, 2010 Oh wow, so they still want to include the Hulk in this? Awesome. Plus its not like adding Norton is going to add a single buy to this film. Much as I like the guy, the draw is in RDJ and in the superhero team up aspect. Wait, is this an opening for Nathan Fillion? Hire that man! Hire him now! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaxPower Posted July 10, 2010 Report Share Posted July 10, 2010 What annoys me is Norton said he was interested, so he lost hand in negotiations. They should keep him in. He might not add buys, but overall if this is the 'new' Marvel continuity, they should keep it the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavros Posted July 10, 2010 Report Share Posted July 10, 2010 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly Posted July 10, 2010 Report Share Posted July 10, 2010 I really liked Norton as Banner, this is a let down. Especially if we get another Eric Bana-esque actor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavros Posted July 10, 2010 Report Share Posted July 10, 2010 I really liked Norton as Banner, this is a let down. Especially if we get another Eric Bana-esque actor. Bana did a fine job, I liked him in the role. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted July 10, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 10, 2010 I'm just happy Hulk(or more likely Banner) is still in the movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavros Posted July 10, 2010 Report Share Posted July 10, 2010 I'm just happy Hulk(or more likely Banner) is still in the movie. Yeah, that's the big plus. Hulk vs Iron Man is something you can market this movie on. Just go totally Ultimates with it and have it be Avengers vs Hulk as the big final battle, possibly with Hulk being set off by something tragic or manipulated. Loki could be good for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missy Posted July 10, 2010 Report Share Posted July 10, 2010 Edward Norton is a pain in the ass on the set, so it really doesn't shock me to hear they're recasting the role. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothian Posted July 10, 2010 Report Share Posted July 10, 2010 I really liked Norton as Banner, this is a let down. Especially if we get another Eric Bana-esque actor. Bana did a fine job, I liked him in the role. Same here, but it's more the fact that Preston hates Eric Bana with the passion of a thousand suns. On topic, it is a LITTLE funny that a project that is steeping itself so much with the importance of continuity has recast another role. Then again, I think the CBM scene was amply summed up in this: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missy Posted July 10, 2010 Report Share Posted July 10, 2010 Oh shit, that's brilliant! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted July 12, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 12, 2010 The Norton thing has been confirmed, and he isn't happy with the way Marvel is handling it. In what is turning out to be a dramatic parting of the ways, Edward Norton's agent has issued a statement to HitFix after Marvel Studios confirmed the Academy Award nominee would not return as Bruce Banner in "The Avengers." As HitFix broke exclusively on Friday, Marvel Studios is going in a new direction for the Hulk, replacing Norton who starred in 2008's "The Incredible Hulk" as a scientist who transforms into a monstrous, but heroic Hulk after a massive exposure to gamma radiation. Marvel indicated their decision was not about salary, as sources had indicated to HitFix originally,, but "instead rooted in the need for an actor who embodies the creativity and collaborative spirit of our other talented cast members." Brian Swardstrom of WME responds with the following: "This offensive statement from Kevin Feige at Marvel is a purposefully misleading, inappropriate attempt to paint our client in a negative light. Here are the facts: two months ago, Kevin called me and said he wanted Edward to reprise the role of Bruce Banner in The Avengers. He told me it would be his fantasy to bring Edward on stage with the rest of the cast at ComiCon and make it the event of the convention. When I said that Edward was definitely open to this idea, Kevin was very excited and we agreed that Edward should meet with Joss Whedon to discuss the project. Edward and Joss had a very good meeting (confirmed by Feige to me) at which Edward said he was enthusiastic at the prospect of being a part of the ensemble cast. Marvel subsequently made him a financial offer to be in the film and both sides started negotiating in good faith. This past Wednesday, after several weeks of civil, uncontentious discussions, but before we had come to terms on a deal, a representative from Marvel called to say they had decided to go in another direction with the part. This seemed to us to be a financial decision but, whatever the case, it is completely their prerogative, and we accepted their decision with no hard feelings. We know a lot of fans have voiced their public disappointment with this result, but this is no excuse for Feige's mean spirited, accusatory comments. Counter to what Kevin implies here, Edward was looking forward to the opportunity to work with Joss and the other actors in the Avengers cast, many of whom are personal friends of his. Feige's statement is unprofessional, disingenuous and clearly defamatory. Mr. Norton talent, tireless work ethic and professional integrity deserve more respect, and so do Marvel's fans. Brian Swardstrom WME" There is no official statement from Edward Norton at this time, but he is expected to comment on the matter eventually. http://www.hitfix.com/articles/2010-7-11-exclusive-edward-norton-s-agent-responds-to-marvel-ceo-s-statement?m=k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaxPower Posted July 12, 2010 Report Share Posted July 12, 2010 Which makes it more like Stravos' post re Rhodes then the being a creatively different thing. I'm pissed as I thought Norton could have brought something to the Avengers movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightWing Posted July 12, 2010 Report Share Posted July 12, 2010 Hmm. I wonder if all this back-and-forth is an attempt to get things settled before SDCC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted July 12, 2010 Report Share Posted July 12, 2010 Like him or not, Norton is one of the more exciting actors of our time. I still haven't seen the IH movie but I loved Ang Lee's film. Maybe I'll check it out eventually but everything I saw of it looked awful to me. I'd love a moment like the one between Stark and Whiplash in the interrogation room with Stark and Banner out of costume/powers. They could be brilliant together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuaveStar Posted July 12, 2010 Report Share Posted July 12, 2010 I still haven't seen the IH movie but I loved Ang Lee's film. Maybe I'll check it out eventually but everything I saw of it looked awful to me. It's not bad, but it's nothing something I'd go out of my way to see either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightWing Posted July 12, 2010 Report Share Posted July 12, 2010 IH is pretty brilliant in my opinion. It really has Banner being a smart guy, not just an emotionally disturbed one. It actually works as a Hulk film, instead of just an Ang Lee art film. Also, no green poodles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly Posted July 12, 2010 Report Share Posted July 12, 2010 IH is pretty brilliant in my opinion. It really has Banner being a smart guy, not just an emotionally disturbed one. It actually works as a Hulk film, instead of just an Ang Lee art film. Also, no green poodles. I totally agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted July 12, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 12, 2010 Edward Norton responds via Facebook: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothian Posted July 12, 2010 Report Share Posted July 12, 2010 IH is pretty brilliant in my opinion. I think it's a better overall package than 2003's Hulk, but "pretty brilliant" seems to overlook some of its awful flaws (ie/ Liv Tyler's appalling Betty Ross and the shoe-horned re-telling of the Hulk's origin). It really has Banner being a smart guy, not just an emotionally disturbed one. Given that Hulk is a very emotionally driven character, I can totally buy Banner's mental state manifesting in the Hulk. And Bana's Banner is definitely smart, even if it's slightly downplayed. It actually works as a Hulk film, instead of just an Ang Lee art film. Right, that's all it was. JUST an Ang Lee art film. An art film with mutant dogs. Rather than a character study that went to the core of why Ross relentlessly pursued Bruce Banner given his association with David Banner, and why he'd go to great lengths to keep his estranged daughter away from him. The meaning was there and there was some GOOD action in there as well. Sadly, it was overlooked by the recockulous finale and, well..... Also, no green poodles. Can't argue with that - they sucked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightWing Posted July 12, 2010 Report Share Posted July 12, 2010 That's a great response from Ed Norton. Props to him. I think it's a better overall package than 2003's Hulk, but "pretty brilliant" seems to overlook some of its awful flaws (ie/ Liv Tyler's appalling Betty Ross and the shoe-horned re-telling of the Hulk's origin). I absolutely loved Liv Tyler as Betty Ross. She genuinely cared about Bruce, and was there for him. The complete opposite of 98% of all superhero girlfriends, including Jennifer Connelly's Betty. And the re-telling lasted, what, five seconds? Hardly a problem. Given that Hulk is a very emotionally driven character, I can totally buy Banner's mental state manifesting in the Hulk. And Bana's Banner is definitely smart, even if it's slightly downplayed. I'm not arguing that, I just vastly prefer seeing Banner as the super-smart man-on-the-run than Banner as a guy who's defined by his emotional issues. ...a character study that went to the core of why Ross relentlessly pursued Bruce Banner given his association with David Banner, and why he'd go to great lengths to keep his estranged daughter away from him. The meaning was there and there was some GOOD action in there as well. Sadly, it was overlooked by the recockulous finale and, well..... See, I didn't care for any of that at all. There was some decent action, sure. But I don't need a reason why General Ross should hate Bruce other than "he's a giant green monster, and he wants in my daughter's pants." The 2003 Hulk feels like a really long, pretentious poem that a goth kid wrote in high school. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted July 13, 2010 Report Share Posted July 13, 2010 Lee's Hulk was flawed, yes. But Banner is a character defined by emotion than he is his intelligence. He's an atomic age Jeckyll and Hyde. It's the anger and suppressed rage that drives the entire idea behind the character. He's more than just some smart guy. Also, that desert sequence is still the best thing a comic book movie has ever done in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.