The Incredible Hulk is…
April 16th, 2007 by EoinEdward Norton is to play the Incredible Hulk in Louis Leterrier’s new version, The Incredible Hulk.
I’m not a big Hulk fan but still there’s something about this casting that doesn’t sit right with me. Norton doesn’t seem like the right choice and The Incredible Hulk doesn’t seem like the right project for Norton. I have a feeling it’ll go the same way as Nicholas Cage’s Superman project a few years back.
Leterrier’s previous directorial outings were both Transporter movies and Unleashed. While I didn’t hate The Transporter and I haven’t seen his other work, his track record doesn’t fill me with hope that this will be better than Ang Lee’s effort.
Entries (RSS)
April 16th, 2007 at 4:06 pm
meh… much as I admire a lot of Norton’s work in the past, recently I feel his ego is getting in his way as an actor, and I would much rather see Eric Bana back in the role with an Ang Lee sequel - I wasn’t much of a fan of Lees Hulk film, but it showed promise.
I loved the very end, with Bana in the jungle warning the militia they wouldn’t like him when he’s angry…
Great opportunity for a lower key Hulk movie drawing on the very human fear of ourselves when we lose our tempers… the TV series sometimes hit the nail right on the head with that theme…
No confidence that the director you mention will even consider that approach.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:18 pm
I think Lee had his chance and good money should not be spent after bad. I would however, like to see Bana back in the role…and seeing more of Jennifer Connelly is always good too. ;P
April 16th, 2007 at 4:23 pm
Ah sometimes the pressure to produce a Hollywood summer movie proves too much for people who could otherwise do great work… I have a small amount of faith left in Lee if only he would bring what he’s good at to films instead of pandering to what he thinks is expected…
April 16th, 2007 at 4:27 pm
I wouldn’t say Lee’s work should be ignored in future or anything like that but as far as The Incredible Hulk franchise is concerned he’s out.
I agree the pressure is often too much for people but there’s usually a good reason for that.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:38 pm
“as far as The Incredible Hulk franchise is concerned he’s out.”
I have an image of you now with a huge cigar and a golf cap with your feet up on your desk shouting into your phone…
April 16th, 2007 at 4:41 pm
Some day Frank…some day
April 16th, 2007 at 5:08 pm
Would you lads really pay money to go and see this type of film in the cinema? Seriously, not being smart or anything, just puzzled as to why grown, educated men like yourselves would want to go and see this genre of film. Then again, I did like the Batman films when they came out although I don’t think I could sit through them now. Also, V for Vendetta was one of my recent favourites, but that had relevance and political commentary. But the Incredible Hulk? Is it some kind of comic book insider thing? As I said, I just don’t get it. Am I missing out on something here?
April 16th, 2007 at 5:10 pm
By the way, did you see how the guy on the left has a big birth mark in the shape of a swastika just over his right nipple? Freaky or what?
April 16th, 2007 at 5:19 pm
I’m not sure if I’d go and see The Incredible Hulk in the cinema. On the evidence so far probably not. I will go and see the next Batman movie, the next Superman movie and the next Spider-man movie. I think Batman is a very interesting character and I quite liked Nolan’s interpretation. I thought Superman Returns was a very good film and so will go and see the sequel. Spiderman 1 and 2 were very good so I’m looking forward to number 3 in a few weeks time.
As far as other comic book adaptations go I liked the first two X-Men films and Sin City (if you can call that a comic book adaptation). As for the rest? I saw Ang Lee’s Hulk on TV some time and I couldn’t sit through Daredevil. I have no intention of watching the likes of Ghost Rider.
Does that answer your question Martin?
April 16th, 2007 at 5:20 pm
Well, i still have a fairly big comic collection in various drawers and cupboards around the house, so I guess that comes into it… also I’m a BIG fan of the TV series.
But apart from that, the whole Superhero thing is escapism at its best - and as you say there’s been some great Batman films, the Spiderman films are great fun.
The first Superman film was excellent, the recent one was good enough fun…
Ok Daredevil sucked but it should have been excellent, as in it was loosely based on the Frank Miller storylines and as such could have been made into a really gripping tale… but I think generally directors fall into some terrible traps when making Superhero films.
I think Unbreakable is probably the best Superhero film we’ve seen yet… even if it wasn’t a previously established hero.
So to sum up, yeah I’ll pay. My love of comics, my love of the tv series and the pure escapism of Superhero themes all contribute.
As I said already though, i’d be more interested if the underlying theme was the beast inside all of us…
April 16th, 2007 at 5:26 pm
Oh! Unbreakable!! Forgot about that. That was great.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:27 pm
Yeah, not strictly speaking in the category, but I thought it deserved a mention…
April 16th, 2007 at 5:28 pm
Yes Eoin, thank you very much. And I agree with you about the Superman films too but know nothing about Spiderman, X-Men, Sin City et al; I thought they were toys you get with the Happy Meals in McDonalds. I like my films to be long, dreary, monotonous, sub-titled affairs, the more depressing the better and in black and white, although that’s not so important because I can turn down the colour on the TV. I love harrowing, realistic depictions of suffering, inhumanity and all kinds of sexual dysfunction. Not the Happy Meal stuff at all, at all.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:31 pm
I really, really, liked Ang Lee’s HULK.
I’d actually rate it as highly as Superman (’78), Batman (’89) and Batman Begins. And it’s a whole lot better than Spiderman and most other recent comic book attempts, which all seem a little too self-knowing/tongue-in-cheek for me. Overly ‘cool’ for the sake of it.
HULK (like Superman and Batman) played it straight for the most part, and still managed to get in some fantastic set-pieces and a top-notch Hulk rampage.
Plus the effects were amazing and I loved the comic-book inspired editing.
All you haters just aint got no taste
April 16th, 2007 at 5:32 pm
You’d like Sin City so Martin I’d say. And there’s enough in Spider-man for you if you want to find it.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:34 pm
Well Michael you have to admit there are a lot of us. ;P
April 16th, 2007 at 5:35 pm
As for Norton.. I just think it’s a shame they can’t pick up where they left off.
He doesn’t seem right for the part.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:36 pm
Bill Bixby, he’s the man for the job.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:40 pm
No Norton doesn’t seem right at all does he? I never like it when they cast well known Hollywood stars as superheros. They got away with Christian Bale because he wasn’t exactly A-list but Norton is very well known and well known for doing very different type of material at that.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:45 pm
You can see why they chose him though - he’s not completely dis-similar to Bana in looks… wonder why Bana isn’t on board… I think he only does one film a year to be with his family the rest of the time, maybe he has his one film booked already…!
April 16th, 2007 at 5:49 pm
Or maybe it’s because Hulk was rubbish but nobodies blaming Bana and he doesn’t want to push his luck?
April 16th, 2007 at 6:56 pm
Well, yes, that could be it alright…
April 17th, 2007 at 11:05 am
Martin: in fairness, Bill Bixby was really excellent - I mean the series was hit and miss, but when it was good Bill Bixby really made it.
Especially the way he could make his eyes go green.
April 22nd, 2007 at 7:49 pm
Check this out. Looks like the Hulk will be Grey!
April 22nd, 2007 at 8:31 pm
Nice one Eoin, given my comments above, I found this quote interesting:
“It’s a kind of Hulk we loved in the show, so it’s kind of more influenced by the show than anything else. It’s very human, very touching, and huge action.â€?”
BTW - the Hulk was Grey in his first outing, and some artists returned him to grey from time to time… it’s claimed that grey came out of the press in different shades, and even green so in the end they turned him green altogether. Dunnoe how much truth there is in that… see wikipedia on hulk
April 22nd, 2007 at 11:32 pm
I think they might settle on a greenish grey in the end.
May 8th, 2007 at 1:38 am
Liv Tyler will replace Jennifer Connolly. Don’t like this casting either. This film will not be good!
May 9th, 2007 at 11:36 pm
Abomination is in it. It’s Tim Roth!!! Interesting, but dumb. Check out the credits for the scriptwriter too. Oh dear…
May 9th, 2007 at 11:54 pm
Bah!
“Elektraâ€?, “X-Men: The Last Standâ€?, “The Transporter”…
Looks set to be a by-the-numbers Hollywood money-spinner - with a fairly unusual cast. Personally, I can’t stand Liv Tyler, and the others don’t seem particularly suited to their roles.
This is what ye get for not respecting the masterpiece that was HULK.
You make me very [i]AngLee[/i]. Hahaha… get it ?
May 10th, 2007 at 12:43 am
FFS - Michaels right.
I mean look at the quote above about following the tv series… human, touching etc… yeah right - ‘It’s very human, very touching, and we’re putting a SECOND BIG GREEN MONSTER IN IT TOO!’
February 25th, 2008 at 9:58 pm
[...] (from here) [...]
March 13th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
[...] Well Eoin blogged when Edwart Norton got cast as the Hulk, and judging by the amount of hits that post gets, there are a lot of Hulk fans out there. I’m a big Hulk fan myself, but I felt let down by the 2003 film ‘Hulk’, despite great casting of Eric Bana as Hulk. [...]
April 14th, 2008 at 8:36 pm
Ang Lee is an excellent director that stepped outside his genre and did a pretty good job considering leap from low semi-low budget gritty exposes into character and society into a multi-million dollar, producer-heavy, cgi remake of a very american archetype, aka the hulk. I think he did a great job in a completly forign land with forign crews, equpment, budget, etc.
If we look at raimi’s first attempt at spiderman–it sucked-(power rangers meets willem dafoe’s aerobic-yoga class) but Raimi really cam into his own in the last two movies.
I say give Lee a follow-up, I’m sure he’s more critical than the rest of us. As for Norton vs Bana, I love Norton but bana was just really great for the role
April 15th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
At least we can agree that Bana should have made a great Hulk.
April 16th, 2008 at 7:35 am
oh my god…it cant be true what I have read…Its imposible to say bad comments about Edwart…HAVE YOU SEEN AMERICAN HISTORY X??? Thats a great great film, full of sensibility and real facts he was a real star there, and he´s so cute!!! I´d kiss him every day!!!!!
April 17th, 2008 at 11:01 pm
I can completely understand your way of thinking if you DON`T know the work that Edward Norton does in every film he stars.
He is just… GORGEOUS.
April 18th, 2008 at 9:38 am
I can only judge Edward Norton by the work that is presented on screen. Despite his early promise in films like American History X and Fight Club he has failed to deliver time and again in his more recent roles.
He’s still a very talented actor he just needs to show it again. Maybe this will be the time…but I doubt it.
April 18th, 2008 at 6:28 pm
Precisely because of his work presented on screen is that I can´t accept what some of you say. Anyway, I respect it but, I DO NOT ACCEP IT.
I am already looking forward to seeing him again!!!!
April 19th, 2008 at 5:05 pm
Can you give some examples Joanna? He was great in Fight Club and American History X, good in The Score, but what’s he done for us lately?
May 1st, 2008 at 6:53 am
Norton is the perfect choice for this film, b/c he’s invested in the fundamental conflict of the character. Fight Club is all the prerequisite necessary, but yes, recently the Illusionist was pretty remarkable film that held its own against the oddly similar-timed film, the Prestige.
A writer/actor flexing his muscles is not what most studios want- agreed, but I think in the end we’ll get a very pleasing, character driven movie that delivers what audiences are hoping for.
Bana looked too much like a bigger Corey Haim when he got angry for me to invest in him as a character. Banner’s not supposed to whine himself into becoming the hulk.
I think this movie will have much more crossover potential than Ang’s, which was a fine film, but this one addresses the mis-marketing of the first one as an action film (which it most certainly was not), as well as the fact that many, many people are more aware of the Hulk from the 70’s TV show, which did a great service in fleshing out a believable character driven narrative.
And if the girls like Ed Norton - I’m all for it. I don’t need any more proof than their own testimony. (to me, asking for evidence sounds like a silly Polish dude asking a model who’s offering to go out on the town w/ him if she likes video games. Can someone say “Deal Breaker”?)
May 16th, 2008 at 8:07 am
[...] thought this film was a bad idea when I first heard about it. Nothing I have seen has changed my mind. I’ve seen their Hulk, I’ve seen their [...]
May 29th, 2008 at 5:46 am
i think norton is the perfect choice one of the greatest actors ive seen i enjoyed the illusionist if you are looking for a good movie you should check it out
June 15th, 2008 at 7:11 am
It seems like there are a lot of people on this forum that are over critical of Ed Norton’s work. I can list quite a few movies that he’s produced since American History X and Fight Club that he did an excellent job in( Frida, Red Dragon, The Illusionist, Kingdom of Heaven). Also, actors are artists in their own right and they should be afforded the right to choose what is right for them , and not have audiences dictate their role choices. I happened to catch the Hulk flick this morning and I thought they did a pretty good job. I did liked Banna as well, but this movie proved to be more true to the books. Ed Norton resembled Bruce Banner far more in build as well as features and his intellect was believable. The previous film was good up to a point and then they completely warped the story line(which made me angry). I love the duality of the hulk character and the conflict over his psyche, but in all honesty I believe that Iron Man was by far the most successfully executed film of the Marvel Franchise.
June 16th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
I thought the Hulk was great… sure, once it descended into a CGI brawl it was crap, but at least there was proportionately little of that stuff overall.
I loved the old Hulk TV series and this film had major hat-tips to it, so maybe that’s why I felt it was 100 times better than Iron Man.
June 17th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
okay to Frank at the top, Eric Bana sucks at acting but it’s nothing compared to Lee’s directing which sucks even more. That first Hulk is, besides the Village (M. Night Shamalon), the worst movie EVER!!
IN addition, Norton does not have a “big ego” as you say. and plus he is really hot . so HAHAHA take that.
June 17th, 2008 at 4:33 pm
Eric Bana sucks at acting??? Are you off your game? Watch Chopper.
June 17th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
Or Munich…or Troy even! He was one of the few who bothered with any acting in that movie.