EdwardNorton Tagged Articles at Cinematical
Discuss: When Do You Recast a Character?
Filed under: Casting », RumorMonger », Angelina Jolie », Comic/Superhero/Geek », Remakes and Sequels »
With yesterday's Wachkowski Bros / Superman rumor came the inevitable speculation as to who would be the man to fill out Superman's underoos. Would Brandon Routh return? Does a reboot mean he's out, and someone like Jon Hamm might be in? It might just be my imagination, but it seems like there's a reluctance to see Routh get the boot. Fandom has been mixed on his performance in Superman Returns but hell, fandom is mixed on Returns in general. As much as we might want a fresh start, it seems a bit unfair and strange to recast Superman already.
But what is the time frame on recasting? From the general hysteria that surrounded the Angelina Jolie-less Tomb Raider reboot, I'd say the general public feels like the actor or actress in question ought to be dead and buried. (I'm not talking about the Cinematical readers, who handled it in an objective manner. I'm thinking of regular news outlets who breathlessly announced "Jolie booted from Tomb Raider?!" As if she was weeping copiously over losing her twin semi-automatics, and not racking up Changeling nominations.)
Yet only a mild disappointment has followed rumors that Edward Norton might be replaced as The Incredible Hulk -- though we were all pretty shocked that they were remaking/recasting the character so soon after Eric Bana went green. Maybe a general numbness has set in when it comes to Bruce Banner, though, because fandom seems to simmer with a threat of violence should Christopher Nolan recast the Joker.
What would the reaction be if they recast Wolverine? Tony Stark? Would it be safe to recast the Fantastic Four?
It's a question worth putting out there. Which characters (and it doesn't have to be comic book related -- any franchise will do for the discussion. Throw in Axel Foley or Jack Sparrow if you want.) can safely be recast? Is there a time limit? Does it depend purely on the performance? Is any character truly untouchable?
But what is the time frame on recasting? From the general hysteria that surrounded the Angelina Jolie-less Tomb Raider reboot, I'd say the general public feels like the actor or actress in question ought to be dead and buried. (I'm not talking about the Cinematical readers, who handled it in an objective manner. I'm thinking of regular news outlets who breathlessly announced "Jolie booted from Tomb Raider?!" As if she was weeping copiously over losing her twin semi-automatics, and not racking up Changeling nominations.)
Yet only a mild disappointment has followed rumors that Edward Norton might be replaced as The Incredible Hulk -- though we were all pretty shocked that they were remaking/recasting the character so soon after Eric Bana went green. Maybe a general numbness has set in when it comes to Bruce Banner, though, because fandom seems to simmer with a threat of violence should Christopher Nolan recast the Joker.
What would the reaction be if they recast Wolverine? Tony Stark? Would it be safe to recast the Fantastic Four?
It's a question worth putting out there. Which characters (and it doesn't have to be comic book related -- any franchise will do for the discussion. Throw in Axel Foley or Jack Sparrow if you want.) can safely be recast? Is there a time limit? Does it depend purely on the performance? Is any character truly untouchable?
Discuss: Should They Make an 'Incredible Hulk' Sequel?
Filed under: Action », Sci-Fi & Fantasy », Casting », RumorMonger », Celebrities and Controversy », Newsstand », Comic/Superhero/Geek », Remakes and Sequels »
Poor Hulk! Batman, Iron Man, even Wolverine get more sequel press than he does. But late last week, Tim Blake Nelson revealed to MTV that he had signed for Hulk sequels, with every intention of taking the villainous center stage as The Leader. But like the rest of us, he has no idea whether or not they'll come to be, or whether or not Edward Norton will return. "It's all good, and I really do hope [the sequel] happens, for all sorts of reasons. But yeah, we did, we had a great time on Hulk together. I'm eager to do Hulk 2 if they make it ... I'm signed on to do Hulk 2 and 3 whether Edward's there or not, so it's not even up to me ... I certainly hope Edward is on the sequel - but that's up to Marvel and Edward."
Meanwhile, over in Avengers land, Robert Downey Jr. mentioned again that Hulk is going to show up in that crown jewel of superhero flicks. It's a strange place for the green giant to be in, because he's going forward, yet lost in a land of sequel rumor and leading man drama.
It's a question we've thrown out to Cinematical readers before, but with all this additional info, where do you want Hulk to go from here? Do you think that he should get his planned trilogy, then land with a thunderclap in The Avengers? Should they just leave well enough alone with The Incredible Hulk? And how do you feel about yet another Hulk recast?
My personal take is that if Marvel can't make up with Norton, they should just give up franchising Hulk, and just leave him off the big screen until The Avengers. Theoretically, you could have an all-CGI Hulk in that, thereby sidestepping the need to replace Norton. It would be clunky, though, and might "really really suck." Sigh. Why does there have to be so much drama in the world of Marvel? Earth's mightiest heroes should have a much easier time uniting than this.
Meanwhile, over in Avengers land, Robert Downey Jr. mentioned again that Hulk is going to show up in that crown jewel of superhero flicks. It's a strange place for the green giant to be in, because he's going forward, yet lost in a land of sequel rumor and leading man drama.
It's a question we've thrown out to Cinematical readers before, but with all this additional info, where do you want Hulk to go from here? Do you think that he should get his planned trilogy, then land with a thunderclap in The Avengers? Should they just leave well enough alone with The Incredible Hulk? And how do you feel about yet another Hulk recast?
My personal take is that if Marvel can't make up with Norton, they should just give up franchising Hulk, and just leave him off the big screen until The Avengers. Theoretically, you could have an all-CGI Hulk in that, thereby sidestepping the need to replace Norton. It would be clunky, though, and might "really really suck." Sigh. Why does there have to be so much drama in the world of Marvel? Earth's mightiest heroes should have a much easier time uniting than this.
Review: Pride and Glory
Filed under: Drama », Theatrical Reviews »
(Gavin O'Connor's "Pride and Glory" opens in wide release this weekend, so here's a reprint of our TIFF review from early September.)
By Eugene Novikov
There's a familiarity to Pride and Glory that, depending on your perspective, could be either horrendously tiresome or part of the charm. By all accounts it's a middling film, an overwrought and occasionally laughable corrupt cop drama that you've seen countless times. But for me, going back to this world of divided loyalties, broken oaths, outraged good guys, and "we protect our own" machismo was like settling into a comfortable recliner. An extremely comfortable one, actually: Pride and Glory is moody, attractive and well-acted. I think director Gavin O'Connor intended it to be grim and upsetting, but at best it's pulpy entertainment, a highly watchable series of well-worn, well-executed clichés.
The closest recent analogue to Pride and Glory is probably James Gray's far superior We Own the Night. There, too, father and son cops wrestle with their commitments to each other, their families, themselves, and the often abstract notion of being policemen. In O'Connor's film, these themes play out along thoroughly conventional lines. Edward Norton and Noah Emmerich play brothers; Emmerich's Francis is a respected commanding officer, while Norton's Ray, despite his talent and promise, has relegated himself to Missing Persons after an initially-unspecified Traumatic Incident some years back. Their Dad, Francis Sr. (Jon Voight), is an experienced careerist who has worked his way up through the ranks. When a failed drug bust results in the shooting death of four officers, Ray brings himself out of self-imposed semi-retirement to investigate – but his sleuthing leads him to a corrupt cabal that may include his brother and longtime family friend Jimmy Egan (Colin Farrell).
By Eugene Novikov
There's a familiarity to Pride and Glory that, depending on your perspective, could be either horrendously tiresome or part of the charm. By all accounts it's a middling film, an overwrought and occasionally laughable corrupt cop drama that you've seen countless times. But for me, going back to this world of divided loyalties, broken oaths, outraged good guys, and "we protect our own" machismo was like settling into a comfortable recliner. An extremely comfortable one, actually: Pride and Glory is moody, attractive and well-acted. I think director Gavin O'Connor intended it to be grim and upsetting, but at best it's pulpy entertainment, a highly watchable series of well-worn, well-executed clichés.
The closest recent analogue to Pride and Glory is probably James Gray's far superior We Own the Night. There, too, father and son cops wrestle with their commitments to each other, their families, themselves, and the often abstract notion of being policemen. In O'Connor's film, these themes play out along thoroughly conventional lines. Edward Norton and Noah Emmerich play brothers; Emmerich's Francis is a respected commanding officer, while Norton's Ray, despite his talent and promise, has relegated himself to Missing Persons after an initially-unspecified Traumatic Incident some years back. Their Dad, Francis Sr. (Jon Voight), is an experienced careerist who has worked his way up through the ranks. When a failed drug bust results in the shooting death of four officers, Ray brings himself out of self-imposed semi-retirement to investigate – but his sleuthing leads him to a corrupt cabal that may include his brother and longtime family friend Jimmy Egan (Colin Farrell).
Hulk Will Return -- and Doctor Strange Will Go Solo
Filed under: Action », Sci-Fi & Fantasy », Fandom », Newsstand », Comic/Superhero/Geek », Remakes and Sequels »
Marvel Studios' top honcho Kevin Feige had a nice, long chat with MTV News, dropping all kinds of huge movie ideas left and right. They dream big over there at Marvel, and they make 2010 sound just around the corner, and yet oh-so-far away if your itching for that spin-off or sequel of your favorite character.Happily for Scott Weinberg and his fellow Hulk fans, the big green one is going to return. You might remember that Edward Norton cast some doubt on that, a big question mark that Feige is quick to dismiss. They not only made their money (always the deciding factor), but they got the origin movie they wanted. "Now we have a Hulk that we can be proud of and that is a better match and fits more with the tone of what had been in our comics and what we want him to be in our films going forward." Just because there isn't talk of a Hulk 2 doesn't mean the character is going away -- he's just taking a backseat. "The truth is that Hulk has had two films in the past five years, and it's time to give some of the other guys a turn. But certainly what we are doing is suggesting and cross-pollinating the characters between films, and like reading a comic, I'd like to set that expectation that anything can happen - and anyone can pop up - in anybody else's story. I would expect that people may see the Hulk again soon before he is again carrying his own film." (But whether Norton will play him again is left a mystery ...
Geek Daily: 'Spidey 4, 5', 'Hulk' Sequels and More!
Filed under: Action », Independent », Casting », Deals », Sony », Universal », RumorMonger », Fandom », Newsstand », Comic/Superhero/Geek », Remakes and Sequels »
The Geek Beat is taking a late-September vacation to Middle Earth -- but it will be back next month and those of you suffering withdrawels can always check the archives. In the meantime, you can relax with a daily round-up of nerdy news bites. (They taste like coconut!) This is relaxing for me, too -- I get to catch up on my reading, my Halloween shopping, and my yoga. I can stay up all night re-reading Preacher (you know I will) and not waiting for an X-Men Origins: Wolverine story. A good way to end summer! Now, onto today's news ...
- According to The Hollywood Reporter, Jeffery Erb and Robert Robinson Jr. have launched Framelight Productions with an eye to producing edgy comic and graphic novel adaptations. They already have options on Larry Hama's Dr. Death with Kip and Muffy, Gary Reed's Deadworld, Ralph Tedesco and Joe Tyler's Sins of the Fallen, as well as their 1001 Arabian Nights. (Clicking on any of those links will take you to previews of the books.) All of their productions aim to do one thing in particular -- involve the creator in all aspects of movie making. "We weren't the only producers wanting to make movies based on these creators' babies, but we were the only ones inviting them in as co-producers," says Erb.
- Edward Norton told MTV News that he's uncertain about the future of The Incredible Hulk and his role in it. There's been no word on whether they will be a solo sequel, or if Norton will be playing the Hulk in The Avengers. "The minds of Marvel are sometimes opaque. I won't say [they're] obtuse, but I don't have any idea what they want to do." Perhaps they're considering Matthew McConaughey, who had no idea he was rumored for Captain America -- but revealed to MTV that Hulk is really the only Marvel character he would like to play. (They could save on the budget -- all they have to do is dye that muscled dude green.)
TIFF Review: Pride and Glory
Filed under: Drama », New Releases », Theatrical Reviews », Festival Reports », Toronto International Film Festival », Cinematical Indie »
There's a familiarity to Pride and Glory that, depending on your perspective, could be either horrendously tiresome or part of the charm. By all accounts it's a middling film, an overwrought and occasionally laughable corrupt cop drama that you've seen countless times. But for me, going back to this world of divided loyalties, broken oaths, outraged good guys, and "we protect our own" machismo was like settling into a comfortable recliner. An extremely comfortable one, actually: Pride and Glory is moody, attractive and well-acted. I think director Gavin O'Connor intended it to be grim and upsetting, but at best it's pulpy entertainment, a highly watchable series of well-worn, well-executed clichés.
The closest recent analogue to Pride and Glory is probably James Gray's far superior We Own the Night. There, too, father and son cops wrestle with their commitments to each other, their families, themselves, and the often abstract notion of being policemen. In O'Connor's film, these themes play out along thoroughly conventional lines. Edward Norton and Noah Emmerich play brothers; Emmerich's Francis is a respected commanding officer, while Norton's Ray, despite his talent and promise, has relegated himself to Missing Persons after an initially-unspecified Traumatic Incident some years back. Their Dad, Francis Sr. (Jon Voight), is an experienced careerist who has worked his way up through the ranks. When a failed drug bust results in the shooting death of four officers, Ray brings himself out of self-imposed semi-retirement to investigate – but his sleuthing leads him to a corrupt cabal that may include his brother and longtime family friend Jimmy Egan (Colin Farrell).
Toronto Adds Premieres for 'Che', 'Porno', 'Bloom', 'Synecdoche', Others
Filed under: Comedy », Drama », Foreign Language », Independent », Romance », Thrillers », New Line », Sony Classics », Warner Brothers », The Weinstein Co. », Toronto International Film Festival »
On the heels of some high-profile NYFF announcements, the Toronto International Film Festival has unveiled its fair share of titles scheduled to premiere there next month. According to Variety, the list includes:
- The North American premieres of Charlie Kaufman's directorial debut, Synecdoche, New York (pictured), which has been picked up for distribution by Sony Pictures Classics since we last heard of (still) possible trims, and Steven Soderbergh's epic Che, which remains without a distributor -- James Rocchi reviewed both films at Cannes.
- The world premieres of Rian Johnson's Brick follow-up, The Brothers Bloom, which looks to be a special sort of con movie, and Kevin Smith's Zack and Miri Make a Porno, which looks to be a special sort of, well, romantic comedy.
- The North American premieres of Darren Aronofsky's sports drama The Wrestler and Gavin O'Connor's oft-delayed cop drama Pride and Glory .
- The world premieres of Genova, Slumdog Millionaire and Me and Orson Welles, the latest from the ever-unpredictable likes of Michael Winterbottom, Danny Boyle and Richard Linklater, respectively.
Cinematical will bring you early reviews on as many of these as we can, so stay tuned. TIFF runs from September 4th through the 13th.
The Hulk That Almost Was -- Aaron Sims' Concept Art
Filed under: Action », New Releases », Universal », Comic/Superhero/Geek », Remakes and Sequels », Images »
Now that most of us have digested our showings of The Incredible Hulk (sans me, because now I can't find anyone to go with), I thought you might like a look at some concept art produced by the talented Aaron Sims. (It is also a rather timely piece, as Sims was one of Stan Winston's proteges, and co-founder of his studio.) Normally, I only give such things a cursory "Oh, cool" glance, but I find these quite fascinating, because one of my biggest complaints about any Hulk movie is how they render him. He just never looks real, which surprises me in a post Gollum and Davy Jones world. I know they have the technology to make him look, well, incredible. But no one ever seems to utilize it. Now, I still haven't seen the film, so you all will have to tell me if he looks better than in the clips and TV spots I have seen.
Cinematical Seven: The Best Superhero (and Villain) Casting
Filed under: Casting », Cinematical Seven », Comic/Superhero/Geek »
I haven't seen this weekend's The Incredible Hulk yet, and will do so a little begrudgingly because it's an implicit (or explicit, depending on whom you ask) diss of Ang Lee's Hulk, a film I admire. But to the extent my interest in the Louis Leterrier version is piqued, it's mostly because of the casting of Edward Norton as the title character's alter ego. It's such an interesting choice -- partly because Norton usually stays away from projects like this, partly because he's so uniquely gifted, and partly because my mind just reels at hearing "you wouldn't like me when I'm angry" coming out of his mouth. I'll watch The Incredible Hulk less because I want to see another movie about Bruce Banner than because I'm curious to see Norton's interpretation of him.
All of which got me thinking about superhero/comic book casting in general. It's a subject that attracts a lot of breathless speculation every time a new movie is in the works, and there's rarely consensus on anything. In this edition of Cinematical Seven, I take a look back at what I think have been the most inspired, interesting, or appropriate superhero (and villain, because why not?) casting choices in recent history -- not so much the resulting performances (though it can be hard to distinguish in hindsight) but the initial casting decisions.
As I like to do with these lists, I tried to mix the obvious with the out-of-the-blue, so feel free to weigh in with what I unjustly left out. In no particular order:
Interview: Tim Roth
Filed under: Action », Sci-Fi & Fantasy », Fandom », New in Theaters », Interviews », Comic/Superhero/Geek », Remakes and Sequels »
.jpg)
In The Incredible Hulk, long-time character actor Tim Roth leaps onto summer's biggest stage as Emil Blonsky, a soldier brought in by General Ross (William Hurt) to hunt down Bruce Banner and bring him back alive. But when Blonsky learns that Banner isn't "just another fugitive," he begins to want the kind of power Banner has hidden deep within. Yet, with that power comes a very large price -- and if he's not careful enough, Blonsky could end up turning into an abomination. Cinematical managed to snag Roth for a few moments to ask him about the character and what it's like for him to be appearing in such a giant film, as well as whether he'd be down for Hulk sequels and more fun with his pal Quentin Tarantino.
Cinematical: Is it important to start the character in a very realistic fashion given the wild changes he goes through in Act III?
Tim Roth: Yeah, I think what's interesting -- and what was interesting about doing it -- was that there was a real arc to the character. He goes through many different versions of himself before he finally goes over the top in the end. So it would've been a little less intriguing for me as an actor if I had a couple of scenes in the beginning and then suddenly I'm the monster. Yeah, that would've been a little dull ... but it was really the opposite in this case, because we really got to develop the character and play around with different aspects. See him as he's becoming more addicted to this; I mean, it's kind of like the journey of a weird junkie in a way.
Our Favorite Summers: 1981
To the Calendar! Comic-Con 2009 Schedule Released
Exclusive: Eli Roth Talks 'Thanksgiving'
Raja Gosnell to Direct Live-Action 'Smurfs'
First Look: Ellen Page Ready to 'Whip It'
_thumbnail.jpg){kind=spacer}
_thumbnail.jpg)
_thumbnail.jpg){kind=spacer}
