HOME TRAILERS RELEASE DATES PODCASTS REVIEWS POSTERS INTERVIEWS BOB $TENCIL NEWS FEEDS ABOUT APPS

LATEST NEWS

Green Hornet Villain Role Not Good Enough for The Cage

by Ethan Anderton
September 16, 2009

Earlier this week we told you that Christoph Waltz was stepping into the villain role vacated by Nicolas Cage in Michel Gondry's Green Hornet. It seems like this production has had nothing but problems from losing Stephen Chow in every capacity he was once attached, to the always dreadful release date delay. However, despite all the bad luck surrounding it, details were sparse as to why Cage exited leaving Gondry and star Seth Rogen high and dry. But Nicolas Cage had some words for the Canadian Press about his departure while he was up at the Toronto Film Festival promoting his newest film, Werner Herzog's Bad Lietenant.

Cage just simply laid it out on the table and said that he "wasn't interested in just being just a straight up bad guy who was killing people willy-nilly. I had to have some humanity and to try to give it something where you could understand why the character was the way he was but I don't think there was enough time to develop it." It doesn't sound like he was being unreasonable, but simply serious about his craft. However, with this type of film, a comedy/action hybrid, I doubt there was much need for a villain with a lot of depth. But if Christoph Waltz is going to be stepping into a role where he's just offing people, then I say let's dance!

Explore tags: Movie News, Opinions

whomever

Suddenly, Nicholas Cage interested in the quality of roles he takes.
Daniel

What the hell is wrong with playing a "straight up bad guy"? Not all villains need a backstory/reason to be bad; hell, look at the Joker.
The Clergy Ark

Really Nic Cage? REALLY?! After so many crap movies you've agreed to star in you refuse a role because its not "deep" enough. Wow. I'm willing to bet the pay check wasn't big enough and he just said no thanks. You lost your actors integrity a long time ago.
Leeloo Dallas Multipass

Hey, it's never too late to start caring about these things. Even if he didn't in the past. I don't really buy into that ideology of, "Oh you always used to do this in the past, just continue the trend!" Can't say I blame the guy either, if that was the actual case. Good for him. I also agree with #2. There's nothing wrong with just playing "straight up bad guys", but even a straight up villian needs to be written well, not in terms of backstory but in terms of presence in each of his scenes. Maybe Nic Cage didn't feel strongly enough about the character to just play him as a straight up bad guy.
agentX

Nic Cage has made cool movies, and he is a type of person to always do his homework on the character, this time for the villain role he didn't have the resources needed to play and do justice to the character. So my opinion, a great move Cage. Bring on Face-Off 2 wwooooohoooo!!
Tra la la la la di da

I'm surprised but impressed by Cage. Way to go man. The Joker? Seriously. Go do some research, despite what is said so simply in The Dark Knight, it's still not that simple.
http://IKinc.net IK

If Cage is reputed for doing his homework on everyone of his roles, I'd wager that he failed out of the class in which he studied Wicker Man. And Next, for that matter.
germs

When the same actor that agreed to roles such as The Wicker Man, Ghost Rider, Next, Bangkok Dangerous, and Knowing turns down your movie, well, you must have some serious issues to work out.
Clover

The story here is wrong ( duh) The reason was the same as Chow! CREATIVE DIFFERENCES!!!!!! Look up the real story. Gondry and the inept Rogen could no even agree how the character was to be played. Christ HELP SAVE UP FROM ANOTHER "Observe and Report 2: The Green Hornet. Epic Fail! You know this has to be a seriously bad project if even Cage turns down the role.
Matty

Ghost Rider. Nuff said.
Jonathan

Cage turned down a script because it wasn't good enough for him? And what, Ghost Rider, Wicker Man, National Treasure 2, Next, and every other movie he's done in the last few years that has sucked ass was just fine? God what a terrible actor.
SlashBeast

NOT casting Nic Cage is ALWAYS a step in the right direction.
http://www.thespeculative.com Marty Martin

#2, really? The Joker has no backstory? The Joker is definitely not JUST a straight up bad guy. If anything, what makes him so compelling is because of his backstory. The audience just doesn't know what it is. Any compelling character period, has a compelling and deep backstory.
seanathan

curious, anyone seen this script? i can't imagine any role not being deep enough for cage since most of his roles are in the kiddie pool of deepness. i'm really curious then if he just missed the boat on what the script was throwing his character's way, or if hornet is truly planning on being a little campy and in turn having a one dimensional villian is pretty par for the course. soo.... anyone read it?
rudeguy

fuck nick cage, fuck him up his stupid ass
stepnik

Nic Cage sucks donkey dick on every level.
Spider

I won't rag on the dude just because there wasn't enough meat in the role. Van Damme said the same thing when Sly approached him for "The Expendables". I see this as working out for the best! **I STILL think Nic Cage is a kick ass actor!!!
votre

Look, you can say what you want about Mr. Cage. (I'm not that big a fan myself.) But there's still a deeper problem with movies like Green Hornet. The big problem is the studios. First it was espionage, then it was sci-fi, and now it's graphic novels and comic books... You've got way too many Hollywood 'suits' looking to make an easy buck off of an existing comic book franchise. Nothing wrong with that except when they seem to think the fans are such drooling morons that they'll accept any piece of garbage the studios crank out, so long as it's about their favorite hero and it has at least one mega chase scene. Seriously people, how many of the films in this genre did you see that you felt were actually good? Other than the first few installments of Spiderman, most were pretty sad. And some (like Sky Captain) bordered on being an insult, even if we did finally get to see Angelina Jolie in leather. From the vibes coming off the industry grapevine, this puppy is starting to feel like The Ninth Gate all over gain. I predict this movie is going to wind up hurting everybody who gets involved with it.
Governor

# 18 Nobody cares.
Leeloo Dallas Multipass

Marty Martin, it is absolutely not true that any compelling character needs a compelling backstory. Just look at Anton Chigurh. Not one bit of information is known about him. All we need to know is that he is highly dangerous and his screen presence alone is terrifying. That's enough to make him a compelling figure. Not to mention he's excellently acted by Javier Bardem. And I agree with #2 that Nolan's Joker has no backstory, stress the words "Nolan's Joker". Just because Burton's Joker has a backstory, or the Joker in the animated series, or the comic book Joker, or the Adam West shows, doesn't mean those same rules apply to the Joker in the Dark Knight. After all, they are all vastly different Jokers from vastly different mediums or films. That was one of the draws about the Joker in the Dark Knight. As an audience, we had to forget everything we ever knew or thought we knew about the Joker and his motivations for doing the things he does, because Nolan's Joker was a completely different breed of Joker that we were used to seeing. Still, that's not to say that I think we should just forget about backstory when fleshing out villains. I very much like my villains to have a compelling backstory, I just don't think that the only compelling villains are the ones with great backstory.
1-7

Backstories can make incredible villains sympathetic, more intot he territory of tragic villains. For pure villains, I don't need a backstory. If the guy's evil and that is brought out excellently, I have no problems. Anton Chigurh, Heath's Joker, Darth Vader (in the Original Trilogy), Hannibal Lecter (Silence of the Lambs) all never really had a concrete backstory and they were made better villains because of it.
DoomCanoe

#19 has the best comment so far. Cage needs to go dunk his head in hot lava. The shit bag
agentX

#22 Why say bad things, if you don't like him, don't see his movies, its simple as saying A, B, C my friend
http://www.daequitas.deviantart.com burak "Daequitas"

what scares us humans the most??? the fear of the dark not dark as in absence of light (ok it may also scare maybe most) but the darkness of not knowing what you are up against, not being able to define your enemy. since you dont know what it is that lurkes beneath, behind, above or right in front of you you cannot defend yourself... thats what scares us so this being the case i genuinly think a solid character development or background is absolutely neccessary for a great bad guy. cause the more we know about the bad guy the more we may even relate, and feel for the guy let alone be scared of him... what defines a bad guy is how he carries himself, how he fills the void with his presence, how he is unpredictable, how he just causes goosebumps on your neck... absolutely agree with #20 and #21...Bartem's Anton Chigurh, late Heath's Joker, Episode III's Darth Vader, Silence of the Lambs' Dr Lecter were real bad ass Bad characters. we didnt know why they were like they were, what made them tick. but we loved them. they were bad down to the bone because we could feel it via their tones, body language, the way they carried their weight etc... lets just hope who ever steps in which role.. they make it count.. and they shouldnt let down such a cult character such as Green Hornet and do justice to him and his archenemies... cheers
Clover

Actually # 24.....The fear of bad acting scares me the most!
ellen

#19 & #22 Then why comment to begin with?
Fed Up With Hollywood

Christoph Waltz takes a roll that Nick Cage thinks is not good enough for him? LOLZ. I think I'll trust Waltz's judgement over Cage's any day...