[UPDATE: Marvel Studios is officially recasting the Hulk for The Avengers movie - Edward Norton is out. Check out the end of the article for details.]
Since its inception, Marvel Studios has deliberately and carefully been building towards a unique and ambitious cinematic event- The Avengers. From the very first tease offered in the post-credits scene of Iron Man, fans have been salivating over the idea and watching with cautious optimism as piece after piece falls into place.
The Avengers was always going to be a challenging project for creative and logistical reasons but the glue holding it together was the excitement of seeing not only the iconic characters on screen together, but also the familiar faces of the actors we’ve come to associate with them — which makes this latest development appear to be the first major misstep Marvel has made with the project.
Evidently, when The Avengers assemble on May 4th, 2012 – it will be without Edward Norton as the Hulk. According to HitFix:
Marvel made a decision to hire an unknown, and they informed Norton that they won’t be using him in the film. And that is evidently that.
It’s widely known that Norton has had something of a troubled past with the studio but this decision wasn’t made because he declined to be a part of the film. In fact, Norton wanted to play Bruce Banner again. He even recently met with Avengers director Joss Whedon and was reportedly so excited by what he heard that he told his agency to keep his schedule open.
Prior to that meeting, his only stipulation was that The Avengers had to push the Banner character forward in some way. Norton may have a reputation for being difficult to work with but in the case of The Incredible Hulk and The Avengers it’s important to remember that what he was fighting for was his character and the story. He’s a huge fan of the comics and this stuff matters to him and he knows it matters to fans.
Passion is only part of the equation unfortunately- there’s also the financial aspect of this situation. We know Marvel initially low-balled Mickey Rourke and Samuel L. Jackson for their involvement in Iron Man 2 and with a project as immense and intimidating as The Avengers, they’re no doubt looking to cut costs wherever they can.
While details of how exactly the negotiations between Marvel and Norton fell apart are unclear, I can’t help but wonder if the studio felt the actor might just be more trouble than he’s worth.
Norton’s performance was hands down my favorite part of The Incredible Hulk so this news is particularly troubling to me. There’s just absolutely no way I can see an unknown actor bringing the same weight and authority to that role. I understand the pressure to control costs, but the true value of this property is not in its budget or box-office gross- it’s the innovative execution of something that’s never been attempted before. As the HitFix article so perfectly sums it up:
“Avengers assemble” is more than just a nifty slogan for a ball cap. It’s a call to arms for a one-of-a-kind movie event. Please… treat it that way. The rewards will be worth the effort.
UPDATE:
It’s official, Marvel Studios President of Production Kevin Feige has released an official statement – confirming the studio is in fact ditching Norton and recasting a more “collaborative” Hulk-worthy actor for The Avengers:
“We have made the decision to not bring Ed Norton back to portray the title role of Bruce Banner in the Avengers. Our decision is definitely not one based on monetary factors, but instead rooted in the need for an actor who embodies the creativity and collaborative spirit of our other talented cast members. The Avengers demands players who thrive working as part of an ensemble, as evidenced by Robert, Chris H, Chris E, Sam, Scarlett, and all of our talented casts. We are looking to announce a name actor who fulfills these requirements, and is passionate about the iconic role in the coming weeks.”
RE-UPDATE:
Norton himself has responded to Marvel’s announcement with this note on his Facebook Page:
How do you feel about The Avengers minus Edward Norton? Is this a big mistake on Marvel’s part or do you think it’s possible that an unknown can deliver in the role?
I guess this goes against the rumored plans to have Norton appear on stage as part of the Marvel presentation at San Diego Comic-Con.
Source: HitFix
‘Anchorman 2′ Trailers Tease the Return of Ron Burgundy’s News Team [Updated] 
Hugh Jackman Reveals Summer Start Date for ‘Wolverine 2′ 
‘Walking Dead’ Season 3 Preview Reveals The Prison & Michonne [Updated] 
‘Breaking Bad’ Season 5 Premieres July 15; Concludes Summer 2013 
Loading ...
BOOOOOOO HISSSSSSSS bring back Edward Norton!!!!!!!
they just want a puppet someone who wont tell them how bad of a job they are doing or the fact they are ruining how the story should go…which NOONE else in the cast will do….very sad shame..as when the movie went off and he was channeling the hulk while still banner…would have been great to see him back and how far he as progressed…the next guy will either be great of flop horribly. if they can write something worth it.
joss whedon is super talented i just hope he is able to make something up to his level or beyond…and the studios keep there noses out of it.
this is news coupled with angelina jolie not being fox in wanted 2 is more depressing than the last airbender script.
hey at least bay is blowing up chicago with nascar transformers! lol.
seriously they should keep ed.
he was the reason the incredible hulk was soo good not to mention that iron man shows up in the end of the movie…so now marvel is gonna have to explain that………but thats not really possible to explain lol
its one thing to dump an actor or actress
megan fox transformers 3
terrance howard iron man 2
well ms jolie didnt want to be apart of wanted 2 so shes a special case but CMON
you cant LEAD IN an actor like they did in the incredible hulk and then just throw all that production away!!!!!
Norton is a great actor, and his role as Banner was the best so far. But, and you knew there was a but, is Banner who we want to see or the Hulk? If The Avengers turn out to be an epic film, does it still fail just because Norton isn’t in it? Having him would have been great, but we know he’s not part of the equation anymore so now let’s look forward. The 2 movies that will truly define The Avengers will be Capt and Thor; if those films fail, I believe The Avengers will fail. Banner does not need to have such a big screen presence but if he will, maybe they could get Norton as a creative consultant or something.
OK so now that Marvel has been bought by DISNEY and therefore have some financially sound owners they are still going to try and low-ball/screw-over anyone and everyone they can who is involved in their movies when it comes to getting paid?
I’m really starting to loose respect for Marvel. I’m already planning to drop my own online Digital Comic Subscription because of how bad that’s been done/managed. I’m not pro-piracy but when companies like Marvel make decisions like they do it sure can make a paying customer feel less than sympathetic towards them over piracy.
Did you know that as a paying subscriber to Marvels digital comics service I can’t simply select a storyline and read it either in its trade paperback version (if one exists) or by reading the individual issues that make up said story but have to wait till Marvel gets around to releasing every issues in a story. And Yet a pirate willing to break the law can download just about any comic book that has been released including some that may not have yet hit the shelves.
Marvel has made some bad management decisions with their Digital Service and its starting to feel like those same folks are now in charge of the movie planning.
Now that is class Edward Norton. With nothing but good things to say about his expierence with the Hulk, Kevin Feige looks pretty damn stupid and petty now. You missed out on something great Feige. This movie could’ve been magical. Edward Norton is truly a swell guy.
“We have made the decision to not bring Ed Norton back to portray the title role of Bruce Banner in the Avengers. Our decision is definitely not one based on monetary factors, but instead rooted in the need for an actor who embodies the creativity and collaborative spirit of our other talented cast members. The Avengers demands players who thrive working as part of an ensemble, as evidenced by Robert, Chris H, Chris E, Sam, Scarlett, and all of our talented casts. We are looking to announce a name actor who fulfills these requirements, and is passionate about the iconic role in the coming weeks.
~Marvel Studios President of Production, Kevin Feige”
Translation (from ‘Sales/Marketing Speak that has been approved by Legal’ to ‘what I really mean’):
“Our decision is based on many factors but only 2 have any real meaning; tradition and numbers.
When you have an ensemble film with established characters like THE AVENEGRS you don’t need to cast top notch actors for every character nor hire some high profile writer to script the thing. We have years, even decades worth of AVENGERS story lines to pull form and at least a dozen actors who are willing to work for close to free just to get accreditation with the film. Many of these even have real world acting experience.
It’s also a numbers game. We made the mistake of not locking Robert into a low end contract for several movies and so we’re stuck with him. We are going to increase the time Iron Man appears on screen in his suit (without Downey) but that still a CGI expense and so no matter how you slice and dice it, Iron Man is not going to be cheap. Who would’ve guessed Downey would have made the kind of comeback he has? We we’re hoping The IRON MAN franchise would play out like the BLADE series did with Snipes where we could pay him the same or possible less while each film made a profit but it just didn’t happen and so we’re making sure we don’t make that mistake again.
We at Marvel Management are passionate about the iconic role that Studio Executives play in the creative process as well as the budgetary restraint process and we just hope we can live down to past examples of Studio Executive directed films. We came in to late on Iron Man 2 which resulted in Faverau have too much creative control. That was fine for the first film but with the sequel we lost the chance to do it on the cheap and ride out the sequel solely on the success of the first film and so we’re determined to NOT let that happen again.
If THOR does as well as we’re hoping we’ll be replacing everyone with lesser known actors who are willing to work for free so we might was well do the same with THE AVENGERS so we aren’t labeled as delivering an inconsistent product.
Thank You”
LMAO! BlueCollarCritic, you nailed it like teron sorensen said
10.0
blue collar critic
DUDE YOU NAILED IT.
i dont know if mr norton is actually hard to work with on set but if he is so what theres a reason he is that way…he probably has the same style as michael bay and demands perfection which is why mr nortons movies are soo good.
although im not sure if i believe norton is hard to work with…he seems like he’s a pretty laid back guy to me lol
the end result is what is important. they shouldn’t have ditched norton. he’s the best hulk i’ve watched so far. Stupid idiotic producers
I am mad and surprised that Edward Norton will not be playing The Hulk. Also surprised that some guy named “Andrew Garfield” will be playing Spider-Man in the 4th movie. But if they replace Robert Downey Jr. and Don Chedle as Iron Man and War Machine, I will have a tantrum.
Such a disappointment. Someone needs to make a Facebook page to support Norton as the Hulk. It was awesome in the role.
Not meaning to be a spammer here, but as a mentioned in another thread… it would appear that the execs at Marvel Studios have been infected with a terrible disease known as “Disneyitis”. The same “do it ob the cheap as much as possible while ignoring the fans and the mainstream audience” mentality which has been around at Disney is now also at Marvel.
Also… I freely admit that I did get a wee bit misty-eyed after reading Norton’s message to the fans on his Facebook page. He is a REAL class act, and I’m Team Norton all the way.
Norton is great.period. think most people in this business that are truly passionate about what they do, get the tag “difficult to work with” there are a few exceptions to this im sure but, it goes to show how much norton wanted in this and how dissapointed he was about not being recast in the role that he defined
Yea aknot we know you want a big dumb pointless movie. Not all of us do
No I want a movie that mimics the comic heroes I grew up on and continue to read on occasion.
Big Diff. You want Shakespeare thats fine, however some of the stuff you want (specially “Nolans” visions) goes against how the comic book counterpart is portrayed yet I dont see people whining about that.
We all have different views and ideas. Mine being action packed and sticking to the comics does not make it a big dumb pointless movie.
That is why you are wrong.
Daniel f, you are a ruhtard but I mean that endearingly because I just dont know what I would do if I looked at any given thread and didnt see you interjecting every 3 and half minutes about someone’s ideas sucking. lol
was wonering when the name calling would ensue
Wow based on Nortons statement I can see why he was so hard to deal with/ end sarcasm
What a class act Norton is Marvel hardcore bashed him subtly of course and Norton has nothing but kind words I love it.
WTF what a jackass you are intell. I didn’t insult you anywhere and you instantly start insulting me? If you can’t respond to me with out a Jack ass personal insult than STFU and ignore me. If you disagree with me tell me you disagree and explain why I’m wrong and your right but don’t personally insult me because you of nothing smart to say. If you don’t know how to debate or think then just move on.
lol..i see youre making friends again daniel
KABOOOOM!
ROFL
@intelliq and Daniel
Guys,lets be friendly here i understand u Daniel,and yeah i agree with u. Intelliq,y did u start talking bad about Daniel,he explains y he agrees and disagrees with stuff…..personally,i just want everyone to get along….;)
wasnt daniel that started all this lol
It’s like you said before Anthony it usually isn’t me who starts it. I’ll admit to having trouble ignoring it though when some one does start it. Funny even trying extra hard not to do anything to set off the usual suspect and instead someone else randomly jumps in and insults me lol. I don’t even recall talking to him recently in this thread I know for a fact I hadn’t insulted him in anyway. Some people just enjoy personally attacking others because of their lack of confidence.
Anyway I’m moving on Id rather have discussions with adults anyway.
Isn’t funny Anthony that Kevin insulted the hell out of Norton and Norton responded with nothing but nice words. Of course I did notice he never really talked much about Kevin. I think he was keeping his cool very well.
“Funny even trying extra hard not to do anything to set off the usual suspect ”
Yet earlier you are quoted as saying:
“Yea aknot we know you want a big dumb pointless movie. Not all of us do”
You dont have discussion Daniel, you have a very locked mindset that everything you type is right 100% and no one else’s opinion matters. At least that is my OPINION on that.
Its much like the way Kevin insulted Norton on the sly so to speak. He is a great actor and such yet he doesnt get along well with others as he attempts to impose and push his ideas and views into the movie process that may not always gel with the movie as a whole and what everyone else is going for.
Some people are just a PITA to be around. Does not mean they cant act or are terrible people…
i know when i get attacked here i have a hard time ignoring it too lol, sometimes i do, sometimes i dont lol
Aknot isn’t that a contradiction? You don’t want them out of costume or dealing with personal issues but you want it to stay true to the comics. Yet in the comics they are out of costume dealing with personal issues and falling in live with each other all the time. So do you want it to be true to the comics or to just be a action packed movie with them never getting out of suit or dealing with life?
Also how is a big blockbuster non stop action film with out emotion or life issues or depth not a big dumb action movie? Maybe I’m missunderstanding the several posts you have made but you have said several times you don’t want them out of suit or dealing with life issues you want an action packed non stop thrill ride. Which basically makes it Transformers which is by the way a big dumb action movie.
Maybe you don’t get what I mean by big dumb action film. It’s a film with non stop action that’s all about explosions with no depth or meaning just one booom after another. Which to me sounds like what you are describing.
Sorry If that comment upset you aknot it certainly wasn’t meant to. It’s fairly clear that while you may not like what I said it can in no way be considerd an insult to you. What you have descriped several times that you want from the avengers is pretty widly accepted as a big dumb action film. That’s not calling you dumb just that type of film. It’s simply a term used for big action packed films with no substance or emotion which is what uyou have descrbed. You have also admited to liking these kinds of films in the past in other threads so I’m not sure why the comment hurt you feelings.
Also I do disscuss and there are many many articles that can easily be found on this site where I take part in a nice civil conversation with some one I disagree with. The problem is some people hate being on the losing side or just being disagreed with so they lash out with personal insults or turn the conversation away from the topic at hand and spend thee paragraphs talking about me and how much they don’t like me. The funny thing is alot of the things I’m accused of being every one on here is or has done. I get called opinionated but we all are and we have all been criticle of others. At the moment you don’t like what I’m saying so I’m the bad guy.
Now can we get back on topic and be adults engaged in a disscussion? Or would you like to belittle me some more and continue to insult me? Make no mistake you are insulting me making negative comments toward my character no matter how nice you attempt to dress it up.
Sure can. What is a big dumb action film? Just because I want to see “side” bars of things that pertain to the characters themselves in their own movies does not mean the “action” movie needs to be “dumb”.
Norton being in the Avengers does not make it “smarter”. It is still up to the writing and directing. Not having Norton does not mean it wont have substance or emotion.
There is nothing wrong with a big action film having substance or emotion, however to take a subject matter (Superheroes) that are built around being “big action packed” in themselves and making them have substance or emotion (over the action) is not needed.
What type of substance or emotion are you looking for?
No even in one of my post I mention the monthly card game they had/portrayed in the books. There are mentions of stuff that happens in their books in the Avengers that doesnt happen in the Avengers. However since they are going the route of each hero will attempt to have their own (or shared) film they can deal with the heavy substance and emotion parts there.
Again I dont want to be worried about a Steve/Janet/Hank love triangle when Cap/Wasp/Antman should be worring about an alien invasion. Can they have issues with wh is on the team and how they deal with each other? Sure. However how deep can you get in 3 hours with 5 or more heroes?
My opinions are my opinions much like yours. Doesn’t make them right or wrong. Regardless of how they are taken. With opinions there are no sides yet some people around here think opinions are 100% fact and or right. That is why it appears others don’t like to lose because at that point the person that assumes they are 100% right needs to somehow prove they are when it is just an opinion.
I have to disagree with you just a bit Aknot. I agree that to convey the total emotions and substance that comes with the comics a movie would have to be hours upon hours long.
However I do believe that “The Avengers” movie would be smarter and have more emotion with Norton in it. We know that the “difficulties” studios find when working with him are that he gives input (maybe too much). That input can be on directing, on writing, on scene set-up for all we know. But it’s that passionate input that brought more emotion to “The Incredible Hulk.” I think it was Norton’s involvement that made it a smarter and, therefore, better movie than “Hulk.”
With all do respect for Joss Whedon (whom I do love as a creator/director) he doesn’t have a whole lot of success creating strong men – - kind of a staple in the Avengers. I think he could only benefit from Norton’s “difficulties.”
“However I do believe that “The Avengers” movie would be smarter and have more emotion with Norton in it.”
How so though?
We do not know how much Norton had a hand in his Hulk. And what happens in the Hulk with regards to being smarter and emotional should not roll over into the Hulk. (IMO)
I dont want to see Bruce Banner as The Hulk starring the Avengers. Nor do I want to see Captain American and the Avengers etc.
Then at what point does the other actors roll their eyes and say Oh God there goes Ed again”?
Im not saying he is a bad actor, he doesnt add to movies he is in etc. Im saying this film is about everyone not just Banner/Hulk/Norton.
There is a fine line they (people in charge) need to keep to ensure it works w/o it being “X” and the Avengers. A lot of stuff can be kept in their own films and movies.
Apparently Norton did not have this view. While he may be right what would have been wrong with saying ok and going with the flow? I really dont see them (people in charge) totally destroying Banner/Hulk from what it is already… So what was so bad?
lol at the wonderkind who thinks this is a debate forum for agressive 12 year olds to routinely insult others’ views then feign victimization every time a person revolts against his prickly attitude.
Im not sure as in 100% positive, but I’d hazard a risky guess that most people dont believe their ideas suck, their movie favs are dumb, or in general believe they’re stupid for liking certain stories no matter what the reasons. Im betting too that most people dont like hearing their generation was the dumbest of all time, lol.
just having a big ole roflwaffle for breakfast this morning!
Aknot I get the feeling you don’t even read my comment before you reply. I never said anything about Norton making the film smarter or dumber. My Norton comments have been about destroying the continuity.
My big dumb action film comments are not about norton they are about you comments of wanting a non stop action film lacking character development or personal story IE substance.
It’s not about inerjectimg substance I’m to superhero stories if you read the comics they are far more than simple action stories. They are full of hidden meanings. Comics tend to be very deep character driven meanigful stories. Most comics hit more issues and carry more substance and emotion than the majority of films being put out. Comic films I. General are dumbed down versions of a very deep meaningful genre.
You can have character development and personal stories in their movies.
How can you destroy the continuity of something if you are continuing on with that same story? The story does not change if the actor changes. Unless of course the actor wanted something changed that does that.
So how does (besides looks) Banner/Hulks continuity change because Norton is replaced?
Yes but to portray any of that substance in a 3 hour block (if that long) you would take away from other parts and or characters of the film.
Again im not saying dont have Cap and IM in a training session talking about how it was in the 50s for 2 mins. Im not saying dont have Janet and Hank sitting in a diner for 5 mins talking about their issues in their relationship. Im saying keep the meatier parts of the substance in their own movies.
There is only so much substance you can put in a 3 hour movie with 5 (plus) superheroes that are dealing with a worldwide alien invasion as opposed to reading a comic series over months/years. And once you add Janet and Hanks substance why not Banners and Bettys? Steve and Tonys?
I agree with you that “Comics tend to be very deep character driven meaningful stories.” However they have had time to build that up. There are those of us that do understand that only because we have followed it.
To try and do that with the people that dont understand that (which are more) will be disastrous for the film. Tough guy Bill that read comics when he was a kid (yet doesnt anymore) does not want to see Cap in a love triangle when he should be kicking alien butt.
Would I be upset if I walked into the Avengers with the opening scene of them jumping out of a jet as they crashed it into the Hulk who was crushing IM under his foot then continue the battle for 20 mins? Hell no. With the tech today more people then not want to see this.
Aknot, do you not want “The Avengers” to be a stand-alone movie? I understand that most development I like to see in characters will have to occur in their separate movies but I don’t think I’d want to sit through a three hour movie with nothing but over-the-top CGI fights. I don’t want to have to see “Captain America” and “Thor” in order to watch “The Avengers.” (Don’t get me wrong, I totally will see “Captain America” and “Thor” I just don’t want to HAVE to see them. I want to WANT to see them.)
Maybe its just hard for me to come to terms with the fact that these characters are coming together for one instance. There is a big threat that just happens to need all of their talents to defeat. Of course that means banter and training and misunderstandings but I don’t want those to fall by the wayside and turn this into a Michael Bay movie.
I want to be able to walk into “The Avengers” not knowing anything about the comic book universe and walk away knowing about these superheroes. A lot of that is going to come from non-verbal communication: body language from the characters not involved in the current dialogue. I believe that Banner would’ve excelled in that arena.
Define stand alone. It really cant be stand alone now that the Hammer was found, the shield shown, and Tony confronted Ross about his problem.
Once they did this they made the point that while yes the Avengers movie will be a movie into itself it is now part of a bigger picture, the Marvel Universe. (well at least the parts they have legal control over)
See you say “I want to be able to walk into “The Avengers” not knowing anything about the comic book universe and walk away knowing about these superheroes.” How can they do that with:
Hulk, Ironman, Cap, Antman? That is 4 “origins”/backgrounds/character development you would need to cover. At least not to mention Nick Fury. Unless of course they cover it in their own movies?
Let me give you a scene… Banner (whoever plays him) in a cell. The cell is created to “gas” him when he gets the urge. He is afforded certain things to keep him calm as they work for a cure. One thing is a TV. Now during this alien invasion the avengers refuse to release the beast. However while watching TV Banner sees a report on Gen Ross (SKRULL) slapping his daughter in a fit of rage over something. (or just for the Skrulls to discredit the General).
Why do they need to show flashbacks to how Banner feels about Betty and or why he feels that way? Heck about Ross? No all “we” need to know is its Banner its Betty and its Ross and a catalyst has been created.
I want to be able to walk into the Avengers and not have to see stuff that has already been covered in another movie.
It is a very fine line I admit (again). But I believe most of the people that will see Avengers will see it becasue they have seen one of the characters in the movie already. Then if they have questions will go back and see one they may have passed on.
Stand-alone movie: I don’t have to see a prior movie to understand what’s going on in this one, nor am I forced to see a sequel to get the conclusion of the story arc.
I’m not of the opinion that an origins story is needed for every character. Usually it should just be for the interesting characters but you get them in spades in a superhero movie.
They’re doing it backwards. I want to know how the characters interact with each other, then find out how these relationships changed them in an origins story. But if I go and watch “The Avengers” without having seen the four prior origins stories than I’m going to be completely lost as to who these characters are. That wouldn’t happen to such a degree in a stand-alone movie where everything I need to understand the characters and the plot are contained within this one story.
“Stand-alone movie: I don’t have to see a prior movie to understand what’s going on in this one, nor am I forced to see a sequel to get the conclusion of the story arc.”
Hopefully for the Avengers it will be a self contained 3 Story movie ala LoTR.
“I’m not of the opinion that an origins story is needed for every character. Usually it should just be for the interesting characters but you get them in spades in a superhero movie.”
Yes which runs you into the issue of who gets more “face” time.. Which if its covered in their movie there is no issue. However people like you that may not see those movies MAY have issues. However most times people like you go with people like me and it is explained. Which is why I say keep most “personal” stuff in their movies especially stuff that does not correlate to the movie “the Avengers”.
“They’re doing it backwards. I want to know how the characters interact with each other, then find out how these relationships changed them in an origins story. But if I go and watch “The Avengers” without having seen the four prior origins stories than I’m going to be completely lost as to who these characters are. That wouldn’t happen to such a degree in a stand-alone movie where everything I need to understand the characters and the plot are contained within this one story.”
But that is backwards in itself. Cap, IM, etc were around way before the forming of the Avengers. Same with Batman, Superman etc. They were around before the Justice League.
Could you show a lesser character in the Avengers first then spin them off to their own movie? Sure can. However continuity wise they would still have been around before the Avengers.
Aknot: I wouldn’t mind “The Avengers” being a cohesive, three part, self-contained story as long as those three parts are written out together, ahead of time: for continuity sake.
Try to avoid using the phrase ‘people like you.’ It just leaves a bad taste.
I’m completely fine with personal history being left out of “The Avengers.” It would be better that it is, I’m saying if your going to leave it out, leave it all out. Don’t slide in a reference that has a big impact on the character in “The Avengers” when what is being referenced didn’t happen in “The Avengers” but in one of four origin movies.
Logan was off being a badass long before he joined the X-Men and became Wolverine. Erik Lensherr was breeding a mutant superiority complex before he decided to adopt the moniker Magneto and go head-to-head with his best friend.
None of that mattered when they were all together, in their contained story, that was the first movie. If Logan’s character interested me I could watch the second movie, but I didn’t have to as the conflict was for the most part resolved at the end of “X-Men.”
I didn’t need background on Jean Grey or Ororo Munroe to enjoy what their characters brought to the dynamic of the group. They were around before the X-Men formed but their origins didn’t affect the story that was being told.
And, in this case, the origins story ruined continuity across the board for the whole series.
“Try to avoid using the phrase ‘people like you.’ It just leaves a bad taste.”
I hemmed over that and left it in. I assumed it would not be taken incorrectly within the context it was used.
“I wouldn’t mind “The Avengers” being a cohesive, three part, self-contained story as long as those three parts are written out together, ahead of time: for continuity sake.”
I believe that is the way they are going to do it.
“I’m completely fine with personal history being left out of “The Avengers.” It would be better that it is, I’m saying if your going to leave it out, leave it all out. Don’t slide in a reference that has a big impact on the character in “The Avengers” when what is being referenced didn’t happen in “The Avengers” but in one of four origin movies.”
I dont think they will and I agree. I hope they still do a little tongue in cheek mentioning stuff on the sly that comic geeks and people that watch the other movies will get. Something along the lines of “Yeah but what would Pepper think”. Nothing that is integral to the Avengers.
“Logan was off being a badass long before he joined the X-Men and became Wolverine. etc.”
True but all of that stuff was done before Marvel took the reins of what characters they could trying to make them a cohesive Universe. Also the “X-men” as a whole is more popular then the Avengers.
“And, in this case, the origins story ruined continuity across the board for the whole series.”
See above as Marvel did not hold these properties and had no control over that. So maybe they are thinking start off with the “origins” of characters and then put them in a team movie. That way they can stay as true as they want to.
For example… Xmen 1st Class I think will be a butchery of the Xmen mythos… I will still see it but it will probably create more questions then it needs to all for the “buck”.
@jessie: GREAT POST
I just watched the Incredible Hulk (the one with Norton) again, and it struck me how weird the Hulk looked. How I missed it the first time I dont know, but it didnt look very real.
Is it my imagination or was the first Hulk (the one with Bana) a little better looking?
I’m not denying lots of people want to see that brailess action films are popular look at Transformers. I’m sinply labeling the type of film. I agree these days people care more about mindless explosions and SFX than they do about story or character.
Continuity is about much more than story it just simply is that simple. If your reading a comic and in one panel Batmans cape is holy and torn and in the next panel it’s perfect yet it’s clear only seconds have passed that’s a break in continuity. Breaking continuty is about just story it’s about an unexplained change that makes no sense and doesn’t fit with the story. If one second a character is clean shaven and the next panel he has a beard that breaks continuity. Continuity is an established story and pattern. It would be a break in continuity if suddenly Batman was a blonde because over decades and countless attire he’s always had dark hair. So it is technically breaking continuity to change the actor of a character.
But why cant a movie be a brainless action film based on already developed stories and characters?
There are many ways of intelligently bringing these characters together, devising a desired end then getting there and still having tons of mindless explosions and fisticuffs.
So then do you agree Nolan broke Batman’s continuity?
Bruce why the Blonde locks? Well being Millionaire Playboy Ive heard blonds have even more fun. Can continuity like that be changed? Yes it can. Should it be explained or addressed in such a way to not take away from the story? Yes.
“So it is technically breaking continuity to change the actor of a character.” Well then every movie ever mad made from a book/story/fable/myth etc is breaking continuity all the time, technically.
Lastly, before retiring from this subject altogether, I think my perception is a little more clear now that I just watched the movie again – and convey what I meant about Norton’s performance.
Norton was fine as a man on the run, as a man missing the love of his life, he was even believable that he might possibly be a scientist if the story would have given him more to work with on that.
My problem with Norton might actually have to do with the director? The director is ultimately responsible for what the characters look like right? They dressed Ed Norton up like a very nerdy school kid who’s desperately trying to escape the class bully. The backpack, baseball cap, and floods didnt reflect a brainy scientist trying to be incognito but a nerdy school kid and brought back an old image of the skinny kid getting sand kicked in his face (for those of you familiar with that comic book ad).
Glasses might helped too, the comic book Banner wore glasses right?
In the end, I just feel the people responsible for the end product didnt make Norton look like Banner, which gave the feeling that this was some other character than Dr Banner. Now maybe those choices were part of Norton’s creative input, or bad decisions by the director – who knows?
Wow you just don’t know when to quit do you intell? You have got to be the only person that made me wish peoples home addresses were desplayed. Just back up. You talk about agressive 12 year olds but have you ever examined your own behavior?
you’ve dodged quite a few bullets on this site recently after repeated warnings to knock it off. You even drive away new visitors and then attack the regulars, then you have the gall to make veiled threats by admitting your desire to know where people reside?
wow kid, you really are in need of some help. Ive learned to deal with most personalities with a degree of humor and fairness on the two sites Ive been an adminstrator at for over a decade, and cant say Ive run into maybe 2 or 3 in all my years doing it that are as young and abrasive on a daily basis as you. This includes my gaming clan started in 1998 and is still active, which has always been a haven for kids who like to play shoot em up – and rarely do I see a personality like yours. Needless to say they dont last long.
Why you’re still here and not banned by now makes me think the guys running the site here are busy with real life tasks and dont see half the things you say.
Well aknot we will never know what happened behind the scenes to make this happen. What we know for sure:
Norton is passionate about the character and actually reads the comics unlike most actors.
Norton has integrity he won’t do a film if he doesn’t like the character or story. How many Bay films have you seen Norton in? For that matter how many blockbuster action films has he done? Nortons integrity makes him usually do certain types of films if he doesn’t think something is right for the character he can’t just say ok and he can’t just do am in challenging film that he can sleep through.
Movie execs love money. More so than they do art or creativity.
Movie execs say it’s not about money.
Movie execs lie….alot
while we can’t know what happened I truly believe it was a money issue. Norton has done plenty of films where he had to share screen time and before hulk no one was saying he is hell to work with. I think Marvel wants to save money. It makes the most sense Norton loved Hulk and wanted to keep doing he was passionate about it and basically begged the fans to help fight for him.
Like I said though we will never know the truth.
Yes but if Norton loved the part so much why couldn’t he forgo a percentage of pay to allow him to continue his desire if it was a money issue?
To continue to do something he was so passionate about? That then leads me to believe it was more a “creative” thing.
Money can be negotiated. Ideas and views very seldom can. With that in mind I would tend to favor the people behind the movie/story (not Disney but the Marvel people) more then not.
Please don’t forget that ideas cost money. Remember Norton wanted Banner to move or develop as a character. That could have cost more than Marvel was willing to spend. Neither party mentions it but perhaps Norton had certain changes in mind. He did after all have an effect on “I.H.’s” story, either rewriting it or threatening to. Haven’t really read anything clearing up that mystery either.
Lest you think that couldn’t have been financially important, I have read that Norton’s changes added several million dollars to the “I.H.” production cost. That might seem paltry until you realize it was in the midst of filming. Cost over runs aren’t the directors or producers best friends you know. Perhaps the ultimate problem is management didn’t want to be perceived as making the same mistake twice. Hiring Norton even accounting for his desired changes then when filming starts additional changes and issues come up. What do you think the other actors would think if management caters to a single actor in what will be an ensemble cast film? I can imagine what was going through Feige mind as he was talking to Norton’s manager; ‘Here’s this guy that caused us nothing but trouble in the last picture we had him in and now I’m dealing with this guy again and it’s starting to look like just more of the same crap we dealt with then. I can’t endure any more flak from the guys upstairs and get no cooperation from this guy because he doesn’t seem to realize everyone has to play ball to make this thing go.’
Then too we really don’t know that much about the story we’ll get in “Avengers.” Look at the James Bond series for example and Pierce Brosnan’s situation. At some point the producers must have been studying and considering “The Casino Royale” story and because it’s an early original story it meant that a reboot of the series was a reasonable choice. At that point Brosnan becomes a poor fit, because of the continuity you’ve built up in all the other films with him . Too many people wouldn’t get it and they needed someone for 3 films perhaps more not a Brosnan send off. They didn’t have a “Brosnan send off story” they had a franchise reinvigorating story. Same thing in this case, I think with the Hulk part of the story we’re in for a surprise…
I agree with you here Daniel f.
From what Norton and his agent have said, they didn’t think money was going to be the issue. They were in the middle of a good negoiation and the studio pulled out.
Man I’m mad as you know what!! I was primarily looking forward to the Avengers movie because of the Hulk and you mean to tell me that you’re good to risk loosing a top-notch actor in Edward Norton!! ….are you kidding me!! You know it was hard enough to bring a good Hulk movie to the big screen, so when you finally get it right you pull this stunt Marvel!! Hello, what about your fans, do you even care? Just checking because it doesn’t seem as though you do! Now this is the second HUGE mistake you have made to this Avengers project (first, being hiring the atheist Joss Wheadon to direct it). I don’t want to support someone who completely rules out God which is what an atheist does!! Now you’re going to completely destroy the project by cutting a premiere actor like Ed Norton!! Man, I’m like screw the Avengers movie because the Marvel Exec’s have their head’s up their butt!! Horrible & selfish decision!!
whedons gonna do fine damn guy cut the guy some slack. can he do ANY worse than marvel has by letting norton go???
“Man I’m mad as you know what!! I was primarily looking forward to the Avengers movie because of the Hulk”
Just saying you know the Hulk can be in the movie without Banner or Norton…. So you dont really lose out if you were looking for the Hulk.
Wow… lay off Whedon. What the hell do his religious beliefs have to do with his ability to direct a movie?
Black Duv,
If you refused to see movies directed by athiests you wouldn’t be seeing very many new releases.
I’m a Christian and I don’t put that filter on a movie or director.
Now if an actor or director is a complete tool (in my opinion), then that influences my decision to see a movie.
Vic
Wow, good job at not making religious nuts look like ignorant savages.
/sarcasm
I don’t think your grasping the concept. Continuity is different for different versions. Comics or books that movies are based on are in an entirely different universe there for different continuity. For instance the long standing comic Batman with over 600 issues has it’s own established continuity and stand alone comic stories like Arkham Asylum or The Dark Knight returns were not apart of that same universe they were not apart of that continuity. So while still being about batman and even being comics they were not apart of the official Batman comic and had their own seperate self contained continuity. Heck the famous story The Killing Joke wasn’t officially apart of continuity it was a stand alone story that was later ret conned (retroactive continuity) in. So TDK is not a part of the comic book continuity. However I would say that Nolan did break continuity with changes the actress of Racheal. Still differant situation and not really his fault Katie refused to come back but Racheal was already written In to the story. It broke continuity but he couldn’t help and had no choice.
i still blame tom cruise for katies refusal to come back lol, damn brain washing midget
So replacing an actor because they have no choice should be ok also then right? Based on “It broke continuity but he couldn’t help and had no choice.”
Your answer (if I understand you) will probably be well the studios should have given Norton everything he wanted to keep continuity (be it money control etc.) which then I say when do you stop?
Marvel has learned first hand what happens when you lose to much control over one of their characters.
To be a fly on the wall to know what REALLY happened would be fun.. I just dont see it being the disaster you and everyone else is making it out to be.