• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

And the next actor to play Bruce Banner is...

Started by Nexus,

24 posts in this topic

bullseye

bullseye

Posted
Posted

Don't get me wrong, I respect his acting ability, I just couldn't buy the rage from him. Norton on the other hand gets the *spoon* kicked out of him every movie, so he might need to vent. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brasseye

brasseye

Posted
Posted

Acting cred's aside, what will make or break the film in the CGI.

Though I don't really applaud this credit of a film, it does seem to be the main 'wow' factor with films aimed at joe public thses days. Arguably $525m should ensure a reasonable job done.

As I don't think the 'rialto' mob will be flocking for this one simply because Edaward has decided to cash in on star status by doing an out an out 'blockbuster'. (or at least that's the term I'm hoping will be applied to this film thumbsup2.gif )

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rob_allan

rob_allan

Posted
Posted

This sounds like they're bringing the movie in-line with the television series a bit. And I'm glad because that will make it a more recognizeable (and hence profitable) product.

 

Norton is one of my favorite actors, so I can't really overstate how excited I am about this. And I have a feeling the -script is probably good given that he's attached to the project. (Unless he's just cashing in, but I can't think of a bad movie that he's been in.)

 

The movie is being shot in Toronto? YAY I hope they have need for extras. Being in the Hulk movie would be A W E S O M E. Then maybe if I could get in a shot, I could actually get a CGC SS adaptation of the movie done with my own sig! Muahahahahaha

 

sorry powertrip

Link to comment
Share on other sites
comix4fun

comix4fun

Posted
Posted
Acting cred's aside, what will make or break the film in the CGI.

Though I don't really applaud this credit of a film, it does seem to be the main 'wow' factor with films aimed at joe public thses days. Arguably $525m should ensure a reasonable job done.

As I don't think the 'rialto' mob will be flocking for this one simply because Edaward has decided to cash in on star status by doing an out an out 'blockbuster'. (or at least that's the term I'm hoping will be applied to this film thumbsup2.gif )

 

 

The $525 million is for multiple pictures...up to 5 of them I believe, not just the Hulk 2. gossip.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rjpb

rjpb

Posted
Posted

Ed Norton is a decent actor - but seems unable to play a sympathetic character. I realize he is rarely cast as such - so this will be a challenge - it will be interesting to see if he's up to it. Eric Bana was pretty vanilla, and certainly didn't make anyone forget Bill Bixby, so the bar isn't that high.

 

 

I'm not a big fan of superhero movies - most seem poorly written, and suffer from the awkwardness of trying to make what works as illustration work in live action. The only live action superhero movies that have worked for me so far are the 3 good Batman films and the Spider-Man movies.

 

Of course quality and box office success have only a marginal relationship, so I expect inferior product will continue to be made - I caught five minutes of the FF film on cable - maybe the poorly written Ben phoning Alicia scene was a bad representation of the movie - but the Thing make-up was so clumsy, that I can't imagine the Cannon version was much worse (never seen it though) - and it was obvious Michael Chiklis is on the short side. I can't imagine sitting through the whole thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fantastic_four

fantastic_four

Posted
Posted
Ed Norton is a decent actor - but seems unable to play a sympathetic character.

 

You didn't find him sympathetic in Primal Fear as the kid from the Midwest who killed the priest filming him in homegrown pornos? Obviously you wouldn't find him that way after you realized his schizophrenia was all a sham to get him out of a murder charge, but I thought he played a shy, introverted kid incredibly well throughout 99% of that film. Not easy playing both a good kid and a sociopath both in the same film--I was amazed at his performance and it's easy to see why he exploded in popularity after that role.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rjpb

rjpb

Posted
Posted
Ed Norton is a decent actor - but seems unable to play a sympathetic character.

 

You didn't find him sympathetic in Primal Fear as the kid from the Midwest who killed the priest filming him in homegrown pornos? Obviously you wouldn't find him that way after you realized his schizophrenia was all a sham to get him out of a murder charge, but I thought he played a shy, introverted kid incredibly well throughout 99% of that film. Not easy playing both a good kid and a sociopath both in the same film--I was amazed at his performance and it's easy to see why he exploded in popularity after that role.

 

I confess I missed that one - was on my list and then forgotten - I'll have to put it in my blockbuster.com Q.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dick Pontoon

Dick Pontoon

Posted
Posted
I'm not a big fan of superhero movies - most seem poorly written, and suffer from the awkwardness of trying to make what works as illustration work in live action. The only live action superhero movies that have worked for me so far are the 3 good Batman films and the Spider-Man movies.

 

I'll second that. Ed Norton is a terrific actor will make a great Banner, but the fact that it's being written by the same guy who wrote X-Men 3, the FF movie and Elektra doesn't bode well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing