Edward Norton Finally Speaks on The Incredible Hulk 'Feud'

April 16, 2008
Source: Entertainment Weekly

Edward Norton in The Incredible Hulk

This is very rare. On the exact same day the first teaser trailer debuted in March, we wrote an article about an apparent "feud" star Edward Norton was in with Marvel Studios surrounding the kind of film The Incredible Hulk was to become. "Norton and the film's director, Louis Leterrier, campaigned for a longer, more detailed film. Marvel Studios wanted a faster, leaner one. Marvel won." Now Entertainment Weekly has secured the one-and-only public statement from Norton that he will ever make on this matter and it's not a good one. He blames the press for augmenting the problem and explains that it's best to leave the behind-the-scenes fights in the dark so the movie can be enjoyed for what it is in the end.

When the news hit publicly in March about the apparent feud, it caused things to escalate to an even worse situation than they were at. ”The press is what kept Edward and Marvel from talking to each other,” director Louis Leterrier explained to Entertainment Weekly. ”[The argument] was nothing, but then it became something big.” I almost wish we could deny all involvement, but we did write about it, too. However, I don't think we were as harsh as everyone else. In fact, we all just wanted a good movie - a movie that was true to what Norton and Leterrier wanted it to be.

As much as it seems easy to jump on Marvel's side and complain about Norton's overbearing desire to change this into a film he wants, the truth is, that's who Norton really is and they knew that going in. From EW: "They hired him not only to act but also to rewrite sections of the script, and they let him function as an uncredited producer. Still, Leterrier was nervous. 'The stories I heard about Edward — they scared the bejesus out of me,' he says. 'I was scared the guy would come in and say, 'All right, you're a little French director who's just done action movies, so you stick to the action and I'll do the drama.” Did that happen? 'Not at all!' he says warmly. 'I love the guy. He has a voice; he just wants to be heard. And he hates lip service.'"

Let's just get right down to it. Here is Edward Norton's only public statement on the film.

"Like so many people I've loved the story of The Hulk since I was a kid, so it was thrilling when Marvel asked me to write and help produce an altogether new screen incarnation, as well as play Bruce Banner. I grew up reading Marvel Comics and always loved the mythic dimension and contemporary themes in the stories, and I'm proud of the script I wrote. In every phase of production, including the editing, working with Louis Leterrier has been wonderful…I've never had a better partner, and the collaboration with all the rest of the creative team has been terrific. Every good movie gets forged through collaboration, and different ideas among people who are all committed and respect the validity of each other's opinions is the heart of filmmaking."

"Regrettably, our healthy process, which is and should be a private matter, was misrepresented publicly as a 'dispute,' seized on by people looking for a good story, and has been distorted to such a degree that it risks distracting from the film itself, which Marvel, Universal and I refuse to let happen. It has always been my firm conviction that films should speak for themselves and that knowing too much about how they are made diminishes the magic of watching them. All of us believe The Incredible Hulk will excite old fans and create new ones and be a huge hit…our focus has always been to deliver the Hulk that people have been waiting for and keep the worldwide love affair with the big green guy going strong.

Cheers to that Mr. Norton! If anything, his involvement and enthusiasm is what has kept me so interested in this new reincarnation of The Incredible Hulk. And hearing about Marvel's desire to turn it into something with lots of action, although enticing, is much more troublesome than anything Norton has tried to do. "During post-production, though, the relationship with Marvel hit a snag. The company wanted to release the most commercial film possible: lots of action and a running time under two hours. Norton and Leterrier, however, lobbied for a more meditative cut of the film that ran about two hours and 15 minutes. Tempers flared between Norton and Marvel."

At this point there is nothing left to do except to sit back and wait for June 13th and hope for the best. There really is nothing that anyone can do - Marvel has won the battle and is putting together a film, with Louis Leterrier, that they want to see. There's no benefit for trying to fight for this supposed "two hours and 15 minutes" version that Norton wanted because who knows how it would have turned out (in comparison). We'll see what we get this June and hope it's good. If not, then the complaints will surface again, but until then I think it's in the best interest of the movie to be supportive.

The Incredible Hulk

Find more posts: Editorial, Hype, Movie News



You know... not to be a jerk... but your lack of citations imply Louis Leterrier talked to YOU about this, not Entertainment Weekly. As for the 135 cut... DVD, obviously. Like Marvel won't double dip.

Andrew Wickliffe on Apr 16, 2008


I am with Marvel on this one guys. Sorry, but wasn't the longer and more indepth cut the reason why the first one sucked so much???? Marvel probably realizes that this is their last shot with this franchise and they need it to go off with a bang to milk off of this potential franchise. If this one does better, I am sure the next one will be longer (like Pirates and Spiderman 3) because they know they already have a huge built-in audience that will come.

Ryan on Apr 16, 2008


Ryan, the reason the first one sucked was because Ang Lee directed it, NOT because it was "a more indepth cut." These two movies have nothing to do with each other so you can't at all claim that the longer version of this would experience the same issues that Ang Lee's version experienced. I agree with you in that I think Marvel does understand to a degree how to entertain - but look what happened when Marvel stepped in and tried to mess with the creative vision of Sam Raimi on Spider-Man 3. We all know how that turned out...

Alex Billington on Apr 16, 2008


Director's Cut DVD Maybe for 2:15

REAL6 on Apr 16, 2008


The issue with the first Hulk, was the story line, and the director... Turning The Hulk into basically an action/romantic movie is NOT what 10 year old kids read comic books for. Yes action is important, every kid that read the Hulk, loved the fighting, and the intense action the comic packed each episode...but also, the angst, the internal issues of using absolute power against the weight of right and wrong...yes love is an aspect, but shouldn't be made the forefront of the movie( a la Spiderman). It's typical hollywood movie making at it's finest...grab a great actor, find an attractive female(s) and make the movie around "them" instead of the actors enhancing the film. Even with the money Spiderman made, it could have easily doubled that, IF the main storyline that everyone sees is NOT a love story, same with the Hulk... or... Maybe it's just me, but i don't recall watching Transformers growing up, interested in a boy and girl love scene...i watched because i couldn't wait for Prime and Megatron to go at it...same with comics, i read for the action, the intense and crazy dialogue, and the destruction those superheros could cause... I've actually run across people, who never read The Hulk or Spiderman, then saw the movie...decided to go and read the comic, and didn't like the comic, becuase to them "it's not like the movie."...(SIGH) I'm not against adding romance to the movies, but damn if i can't get what i went to go see...if i wanted to see a chick flick, i'd put a skirt on, and go to the next lame Julia Roberts crapfest... As for Ang Lee...that was beyond idiotic, someone was seriously loaded on meth when they made that decision...

Nicc on Apr 16, 2008


i believed that Norton could do a great Hulk better then Ang Lee shitfest but now Marvel is screwing around with it just to make it shorter i don't no now im having my regrets now, just have to wait and see.

Curtis on Apr 16, 2008


in the end we all just want to see a great hulk movie and we dont know if what marvel is doing will make the movie better or worse and same goes for norton so i say we should not say anything unless we have all of the facts and know what they want to do to the movie so lets just wiat and see what it looks like when it comes out and then start complaining

CHEEKYmonkey on Apr 16, 2008


I really hope its good but for some reason i don't think its going to be, Ill see it anyway. Anyone notice the huge decline in good Marvel movies these days? I think it was better when they let the directors bring back the franchise and take chances, X-men 1 & 2 awesome, 3rd, sucked. Spiderman 1 & 2 awesome, 3rd one sucker, Hulk sucked, F4 1 & 2 tho entertaining, in the end, sucked in comparison, Punisher? Entertaining but sucked. Ghostrider, horribly sucked. They need to get a clue and let some good movies be made, when they interfere too much it just plain sucks.

Richard on Apr 16, 2008


Richard, I'm not trying to start anything, but are you serious?...X-Men 1 and 2 awesome??? Spiderman 1 and 2 awesome??? They are nothing more than vastly over-hyped movies, promoted by CGI eye candy on TV, good for a bucket of popcorn, but not much else... Awesome movies, are ones that draw you back decades later, like The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, Casablanca, Raging Bull... ever been in the local video store and seen the rows of these movies on sale? they don't get bought, because it's not worth it...I've yet to buy any of these movies, i still haven't seen spiderman 3 or X3, and i won't....because i know it's the same basic filler as the first 2 parts... There is no way on earth, any of these movies deserve more than 3 stars at the most, and that's being generous... I'll give you that they are eye popping when you see them the first time...but let me make a comparison. Compare the long term nostalgic love and following of the visually lame(by our standards today)Ghostbusters to the following of Spiderman 1. oh that's right, Spiderman 1 has no following at this point, and it's not even a decade old... They still have petitions online to this day, for another Ghostbuster movie to be made, because the first was a classic, and people still love to watch it to this day... that's the difference... The same problem i noted earlier is eveident in the GI JOE thread, look at the posts about how HOT some woman is, and how it will be a great flick...that's the reason why movies continue to be made in the same crappy fashion over and over...

Nicc on Apr 16, 2008


I grew up with those comics, I collected them all, I read numerous stories, and I still have them, so when I say they are awesome thats where I'm coming from. And I'm talking about Marvel movies, non of which you are referred to in your descriptions. I never said they were classics or that they appeal to the masses, however I do think they will be classic Marvel gems. These movies have their own niche and if you didn't like spider-man and x-men you obviously don't belong in that niche and should probably not engage in conversation about it... The Nazi scene in X-men 1 was so great, it forged the feel, depth and emotion of the rest of the movie for fans, the first time spiderman swung through the air on screen was captivating to fans. I actually have seen all those other movies you mention, even own some and I like the first 2 of both spiderman and x-men more. However neither are too high on my all time favs list. All item Marvel favs, yes.

Richard on Apr 16, 2008


Also you better believe those movies you talked about were completely and totally hyped-up when they came out, just because we have better technology/cgi now shouldn't knock the stories or movies themselves. And the reason those movies are on the shelves for cheap is because everyone has them already not because they suck and no one wants them lol.

Richard on Apr 16, 2008


You're basing your love of the Movie, based on the written word of the comic? lmao I'm not saying any movie doesn't have a niche, or a fanbase...the point is, it's overly hyped...i was alive when Ghostbusters came out, was it hyped...sure, but nothing like we have today...which i do understand our technology and media coverage is vastly superior to those days, that's a given. As a fan myself of the comics, i find it incredible that a fan of the comic can call those movies awesome, i do respect your opinion, i just don't see it...they are nothing like the comic. Now i do fully understand that a movie cannot be made just like a comic. BUT, lets be real, these movies could have easily been more comic "friendly"...which is the issue of the Hulk currently. Even if i don't like a movie, i have every right to discuss the movie, just as you do...discussion isn't limited to those that only agree. as for the Nazi X and Spiderman quote, i suggest you own your statement and don't speak for everyone. While i'm sure alot of people felt as you did, there are plenty that didn't...and i completely disagree on the Nazi X-men scene...IMO, it had no zest and appeal to it, like the comic did... my bottom line point is, those movies are STYLE over SUBSTANCE...it can't be denied...so my question is, why is it so hard to have both? As for everyone buying those movies...hardly, even on shipemt day for those movies, they were still on the shelves... When a movie hits TNT and TBS monthly within 2 years after dvd release, it's a basic formula, that the movie is just eye candy and nothing more... thanks for responding Richard...

Nicc on Apr 16, 2008


First off whoever the JERK was inside the production who decided to take a private matter public just so he could see what he saw all over the media should be flogged. It is the media that took this drama where it should not have been. It's honestly none of our business what they do until the film is released. This happens on almost every film which is why we always get directors cut DVD's. Like the poster said above the first film though I liked it failed for several reasons. Many films could be much better or are more viewable multiple times if you cut some of the fat out. Now the fans will eat up that extra 15 minutes when that cut hits on DVD. We're fortunate enough to be able to see both versions of the film at some point or another. This is an important film to Marvel. This isn't some other studio making it. I'm sure Norton's version is great too. It's only 15 minutes guys.

Ed M on Apr 16, 2008


Oh and Alex regarding Marvel stepping in on Spider-Man 3...it became the highest grossing comic book film in history despite what fanboys and purists thought.

Ed M on Apr 16, 2008


@nicc dont bother with spidey 3 it was worse than the first 2 but xmen 3 was far superior to the first 2 in that series, def worth seeing and i agree with you on the love story within the movies, i want to see an action movie not some cheesy crapfest of a love story like in spiderman, add some romance but know when your overdoing it and it hurts the story im certainly not against eye candy provided they have some acting ability, throw some chick like paris hilton into a film your obviously not shooting for best actress though as for the hulk, the teaser trailer with its crap editing was better than what ang lee made

harrison on Apr 16, 2008


Hey Nicc, do you have access to records showing what you are saying is true or just your own opinion? Show me some stats showing that spiderman 1 & 2 and x-men 1 & 2 don't have better dvd sales then any of the movies you listed put your money where your mouth is. I was alive when ghost-busters came out too, I saw it in the theater, and I personally think it is OK. In other words just because you say something has style over substance doesn't make it true. Maybe for you... Own YOUR own opinions. Did you read what I said? Those movies you like were crazy hyped when they came out, no, no internet blogs and websites but every media there was at the time had them plastered all over. Don't give me that excuse about overhype. Did I say this? "You're basing your love of the Movie, based on the written word of the comic?" read again, I loved the comics, I know them, I therefore have a pretty solid base as to whether they are good or not from a real fans perspective, not someone who probably knows comics from watching Spidey and Friends on Saturday morning cartoons. I do own my statements and stand behind them with details about why, I don't blabber about, comics? lmao, blah blah Casablanca is better because etc etc. (well no sh!t its not even in the same genre, apples to f'n watermelons anyone?) You tell people that your opinion "can't be denied" like your the last word, you are denied I deny you how about that? But hey thanks for responding and not starting anything Nicky.

Richard on Apr 16, 2008


@ Harrison, the 3rd X-men better? Wow thats a opinion I've heard from 1 person. I'll admit as a fan I hated it, as a movie goer I saw it again, and one more time and each time have liked it a little more. I guess I could kidna see how some people might like it more, it reminded me of a Marvel: What If movie vs what should have been the real true X-men 3 to finish off a great franchise, hopefully Wolverine will make things right, which looks to be the case far. @ no one, I think the love story aspect is essential, dosen't have to be girl/boy or woman/superman love but it should be love for freedom, an idea, something, or else most niche movies like this would suck. I also think that they need something to attract the lady audience, I know my wife will get more from the movie and talk about the "love" aspect more then, say the "action" element 9 times outta 10.

Richard on Apr 16, 2008


Ed #14, Spiderman 3 was a godawful mess, regardless of how much it grossed - which it largely did as a result of the franchise's previous successes. I've mentioned it on here ad nauseum, but I've read Norton's script for TIH and I never really felt it was overlong and it never came even CLOSE to breaching Ang Lee's Hulk territory. I'm curious what Marvel has cut out. I am, by nature, very skeptical any time a studio comes in and starts playing cut-and-paste with a film against the interests of the talent involved in actually making it. More often than not - FAR more often than not, it turns out badly. Because one of the dark secrets of Hollywood is that studio heads know JACK SHIT about making movies.

John on Apr 16, 2008


Marvel should keep their nose out of this! They are going to make a S#IT load of coin off this anyway. So just let Leterrier and Norton do their thing. I hate it when the studios butt in and demand stuff be cut out and the time be cut down. The story needs to be darker, more adult and over 2 hours running time. Usually on a shorter running time, they rush the scenes and you don't get the great character and story development. Dear god I hope Marvel doesn't F this up! This is my most anticipated movie of the year.

K on Apr 17, 2008


Richard getting mad, and calling names... Are you serious? The limit you can discuss anything that doesn't agree to your opinion, you automatically go into 3rd grade name calling? Let me ask you a question concerning DVD sales...how many of the movies i quoted have dozens of copies sitting in the used bin section?....not many if any at all...You show me any store that has at least 20 copies of used Casablanca or Ghostbusters movies waiting to be bought. BUT i already know you won't find that...it's simple common sense...if sales are the equivalent of greatness then Hannah Montana is the greatest singer alive... Sales don't make a great movie...the fanbase does, the years and decades that pass, that the movie is still watched, still loved and still talked about, long after it's time had passed. And no Gostbusters did not have the same hype as these movies, if you recall, the studios almost all passed on making that movie because they assumed it would flop...it stunned the hollywood landscape and became a classic...only after the movie started showing serious potential did the slew of T-shirts and memorabilia start flooding the street. It's nothing like it is today...and you missed the point entirely about likely Ghostbusters, that is not the point...it IS a classic regardless whether you like it or not, same with the discussion thread on the Breakfast Club, not everyone likes the movie, but it is a classic, there is no debate on this...now Spiderman or X-men are not classics, and are not full of greatness, do plenty of people like those movies, sure millions i don't doubt...but that won't equal greatness, not now, not ever...which does equal style over substance...movies with substance first and/or style second always stand the test of time... i do like how you pick the "genre" and can't discuss outside the box, it's easy to call these movies awesome, when they don't have any real competition in their own respective genre, so according to you, it's not fair to debate greatness outside the genre...apples to watermelons...you're damn right, when i discuss top films of all time with people, separating genre is never brought up...because it isn't important, nor does it apply...same when i discuss reading material, i don't just corner Comics and Graphic Novels by themselves, i debate them right along side books i guess those top 100 lists are way off, they should have discussed the genre aspect, and only done the best within it's own...that's complete crap, and you know it...you measure greatness stacked against the best all time... As for the Love aspect, yes it is important, but it shouldn't be the forefront, which it is in these movies, these movies are made on the premise of love first, which the comics while having love involved was not 80% of the comic, like Spiderman the movie has been...Batman Begins did a good job of not over doing it, there was love, but it didn't override the whole movie... my opinions about something be a classic is just that, but when a movie is considered a classic worldwide, then it isn't just my opinion...and i am right, that can't be denied... and please stop with the lame attempts at assuming you know anything about me or my knowledge of these comics...defensive posture is reflective of defeat... Harrison, thanks for the input, i'll give X3 a shot, and let you know what i think...

Nicc on Apr 17, 2008


I have to agree with a previous poster who said that they liked "X-Men 3" better after watching it a few times. I own the DVD, yet I was angry after sitting through it at the theaters. They totally butchered the "Dark Phoenix" storyline, and mishandled some of the cooler characters in the X-Men universe. Professor X dead? WTF? Why didn't Wolverine's pants rip apart like the rest of his clothing in the big finale? Think about that one a sec. With that said, there are things that I like about "X-Men 3", so I can watch it, and even enjoy it to some degree. I just have to forget ever reading the comics. Sometimes you have to seperate the two mediums in your mind. If not, you'll hate every movie based on a comic book. The same argument can be made for "Spider-Man 3". I've always liked the character of Venom, but as much as I love the "Secret Wars" storyline where Spidey gets the black suit, it would have made a goofy movie. "Spider-Man 3" was not a great film, but it brought closure to the previous films, which in comparison are superior. I enjoyed parts of it, so I can watch the movie, and set aside my issues with the story. "Hulk" was a mess, I admit. The CGI was amazing at times, and then horrible in the very next scene. Ang Lee, god bless him, should have never been given the helms of that movie. He's not a bad director, he just didn't understand the source material. I don't have too high of expectations for "The Incredible Hulk" being much better, but I'll go see it. "Fantastic Four" was another one that I enjoyed, but had issues with everyone cast except Chris Evans, who was great as Johnny Storm. As much as I like Michael Chiklis, he's not a handsome guy. The biggest trajedy of the Ben Grimm story was that he was a good lucking guy who got transformed into a rock monster. The movie went "popcorn" and left the dramatic elements out. That's ok, I can live with it. "Rise of the Silver Surfer" was a better movie, but only barely. "Daredevil" was entertaining, and I actually loved the twist of having Michael Clark Duncan play Kingpin. Affleck was ok, as was Garner. Colin Farrell was the best part of that movie. The movie version of Bullseye with the scarred head is far superior to the comic version. Still, most people pan "Daredevil" as a dud. "Elektra" sucked, even with Garner looking hot as ever. Much like the other female super hero flick "Catwoman", it was a completely unwanted movie. Thomas Jane's "Punisher" was cool. Apparently I'm a minority on that one. "Ghost Rider" was painful to watch. I almost threw away my Nic Cage DVD collection after that one. When you compare all these movies to previous takes, like Roger Corman's "Fantastic Four", or the 90's Captain America movie, you'll see that they are getting better. "Batman Begins" threw down the gauntlet for comic book movies. "Superman Returns" unfortunately never had higher goals other than to pretend to be part of the Christopher Reeve films. The truth is, we will never be completely satisfied with someone else's vision of the comics that we grew up reading. Translating those characters to film, can't be easy, and I think most directors purposely distance themselves from the comic versions. It's not out of disrespect, but out of a need to do something different, and not completely rip off the original material word for word, panel for panel. We complain, but we watch them. We love them. They're our movies, good or bad.

TCox on Apr 17, 2008


Hey Nicky, I love how you come into a discussion about marvel comic movies bag them, and then say casablanca is better, why don't you go to a comic convention and tell Todd Mcfarlane that his spiderman art is crap and Picasso is better because its been around for hundreds or years, its all about the genre discussion, don't make it something its not and try to convince me your right when you are comparing apples to watermelons, thats idiocracy. The reason there isn't 100 stacks of those movies on the shelves is because no one wants them or at least only a select few, (myself included actually) and they only buy a small amount and order more when out, its supply and demand, simple economics, spare me your baseless reasoning about its because those movies suck. I'm comparing these movies by marvel movie standard, read the FIRST post again before you go off. defensive what is what? give me a break. lol. But whatever your right you have a far superior intellect, why argue about it, it cant be denied I guess right?

Richard on Apr 17, 2008


TCox, thats a very good rundown, I agree with everything you said. I personally really liked Daredevil, there were some cheesy things but I think Ben was given the shaft, there were way worse marvel movies then Daredevil. I'd actually like a Daredevil sequel. I cant wait for the new Punisher too, I love that main actor from Rome, hes great, I hope he can breathe new life into that weak first chapter.

Richard on Apr 17, 2008


The major for me with X-men and F4 is that there are to many characters to fully get to know and get a good feel for, it seems really packed and rushed to get them all noticed, even tho they admittedly have to cut characters...but even with the cut, it's almost impossible to "feel" the characters as a whole...Grey and Magneto are perfect examples...there is such much to be learned and understood with those characters...they almost need a movie by themselves to fully show who they are... That really isn't something that can be addressed in a 2 or even 3 hour movie...I'd love to see WILDCATS, Gen13. DeathMate and a few others, but i'd be hard pressed to expect to see anything different...real curious on how indepth Watchmen is going to be, wanna see if Snyder can pull it off. Tcox, I agree actually, i'll watch the movies, when they come on sometimes...sometimes i don't...and i agree with the point of they won't be like the comic, and basically we have to let that go in our head... but, isn't that the reason we are seeing these in the first place? Isn't that why they are being made, because of the comic or GN in question? Would i have even seen these with the same passion had i not read those comics or GN's? Your rundown of the movies is exactly my point, great popcorn movies, but not much more. I'm going to see The Dark Knight, because i do have faith that they won't slaughter it, and i'm really curious about The Hulk, because i trust Norton to put his heart into it... Richard, I'm just going to agree to disagree at this point...Enjoy the movies

Nicc on Apr 17, 2008


I agree to that! I suggest you watch X-men 3 now I'm wondering if you would like it or not, let us know.

Richard on Apr 17, 2008


I know I rambled in my previous post (#21), but I want to get back to "The Incredible Hulk". The mystery behind the lack of promotion, together with the "rumors" of behind the scenes turbulence between Norton and Marvel make "The Incredible Hulk" less exciting for me. Whether or not the media is to blame is irrelevant. The damage is done for me. I think the trailer was pretty lame, and the CGI Hulk is not much better looking than Ang Lee's version. What's with the veins, by the way? Abomination, while completely different from the comics, is somewhat cool looking. I'm realy glad they didn't make him look like a big lizard. Ang Lee's "Hulk" is still pretty fresh in my mind, and I don't understand why a new movie was fast tracked, when so many other characters have yet to be explored. I personally didn't feel a need for another Hulk movie, nor another Punisher (which makes 3 total (counting the Dolph Lundgren flick), nor an X-Men Origins flick about Wolverine. I realize I could be mobbed for saying that, but do we need it? Jackman's great, and he's one of my favorites, but come on...really? Why all of a sudden make Sabretooth more than he was in the first film, and tell us it's a prequel? There was never a second of the their interaction in that movie that suggested they had any history. Did I miss it? Sure, I know the relationship they have in the comics, but what about continuity in the films? I find it rather annoying. If you're gonna change things up, then leave them changed. We've seen this kind of back peddling before with the Star Wars prequels. At least Lucas had the nerve to just go back and change the old stuff to work with the new stuff. I hate that he did it, but I understand why. Back to Punisher. Why? This will be the 3rd movie with a 3rd actor playing the role. Punisher is not X-Men, nor Spider-Man. Hell, even Blade made it to a third movie with the same actor in the role. Why is he getting another movie? So a bunch of money is getting thrown into another movie about a 2nd string character, directed by a no-name, and starring a no-name? Box office bomb is what that equals up to. It might be a good movie, but it seems like a bad business decision. Anyone agree?

TCox on Apr 17, 2008


I completely agree with you TCox.

keleric on Apr 17, 2008


Nic (#24) You're right. That it why we see the movies. I'm sure in the conceptual stages, a lot of these movies are closer to the comics we love. With an exception of a few directors who love to piss off the fan base, I'd say most would prefer to stay true to the characters. When you throw in casting choices (big stars cost big dollars), and special effects budgets, many times the characters get short changed because there's no money left. "Justice League" is going to be one of these movies, because there's simply no way to showcase all these powers and abilities on a live-action budget. If they were smart, they'd ditch the who thing and do a CGI version.

TCox on Apr 18, 2008


Richard and Harrison, So to be fair i rented both X3 and Spiderman 3, i asked my wife, who doesn't really enjoy these movies, to sit and watch, and give me her take on it as well... I'll start with Spiderman 3... All i can say is wow, i had no idea that the level of dialogue and storyline had fallen that far in just looking back to the comparison with the first movie. The acting was ok, it seemed a bit dis-interested from the characters point IMO...like the overall feeling on the set was "ok, another scene, lets get it over with." Some of the CGI was impressive, other times it wasn't. And i was personally disgusted with the portrait of Venom...absolutley horrible IMO. After seeing that movie, i am really glad they decided NOT to include Carnage. Easily the worst of the 3, I've got to believe there were other forces guiding this movie, as Sam, while not the best director...isn't anywhere near that bad. X3... It was decent, as i said before, and even more so with this film, just to many characters to get a solid feel for. I actually did like the plot, although i felt the storyline was rushed, it went from some type of cure, to outright war in what seemed like a few minutes. I gotta say, i think Jackman did his best acting as Wolverine in this one, it seemed to me, like he really was feeling the role. The ending was, well lets be honest...it was average, and it was really rushed, not sure if that could be helped having that many characters on screen and trying to spread out the war. Juggernaut, my God they butchered my fav character, i couldn't believe that, it just was horrible. Overall it was decent like i said, i found some things very well done, but the same issue arises, just to much to deal with and show in the movie, and not nearly enough time. Tcox, I'm not against anything being made, or redone...if it's being done the right way and for the right reasons...which is why i'm curious how The Hulk is going to manifest on screen, because i see the same issues with the Norton/Marvel aspect as you mentioned, and yes it is a concern. Yet, Norton is very involved, and very into his work, which makes for a complex situation. I can actually deal with the so-so graphics, if the storyline is gripping and compelling. That's where i think that Norton is putting in his best effort, in the script. I just hope it shows, because i gotta believe he loves this character, as much as he's stated he does to the media concerning the movie. As for the Punisher, i say hey, lets throw Deathblow, Deathlok, Savage Dragon and a few others in the mix, and make a seriously fun shoot'em up hero flick...just non-stop action all the way thru... ok, so i'm dreaming...

Nicc on Apr 18, 2008


So then would you agree that at least spiderman 1 & 2 were awesome in comparison to 3? heh. Yeah it was a complete and utter disappointment for me. The only part I somewhat liked was when Harry died to "save" his friends therefore redeeming himself, but other then that, the dancing, the emo, the whole thing, seemed blah~! X-men 3 I do agree, was great work for Jackman. You mean you didn't like when Juggernaut said "I'm Juggernaut Bitch!" when I heard that I almost wanted to walk out, that they would put in something out of a stupid ass comic cartoon mockery from youtube... I was floored. I think any director with 1/2 a brain could have turned the existing movie into something much better. I don' think I'll ever watch another Brett "Rat"ner movie. I kinda agree that the Hulk seemed to come out too soon to the other, but then again, the other sucked so badly that this one almost seems necessary. I don't know, I don't have a good feeling about it but I hope Im plesans surprised. But yes, I definatly agree there are better avenues to explore, and honestly I think Watchmen and The Spirit and Hellboy are there its at atm. As far as punisher, I think that the story is so potentially good that they keep trying to get it right, they just need someone who cares about it to make it and it will be good.

Richard on Apr 18, 2008


Yes Richard, in comparing part 3 to part 2 i'd have to say between those 2, that 2 would be awesome...i just wouldn't use that term against other movies...but i get your point on that and where you're coming from. Yeah man, so i'm sitting there right, i got my buffalo wings, and my beer...and i see this...this...i don't know, mini, somewhat "juggernaut" looking character, with no real personality, and what seemed to be the attitude of a stereotyped construction worker...i was in my own house, and i almost walked out. As far as the time frame on The Hulk coming out, well it could be to soon...but you gotta remember, right after the first one, the fans, especially online let loose with round after round of negative things to say(rightfully so). So i think the studio was like: Hey, we gotta give them something and soon... because you have to remember, negative attention is still ATTENTION...and they can feed off that also. The good feelings and hype aren't the only why to sell a movie, you can profit and benefit off the backs of negatiove movie goers, if you've done it right in the marketing. IF Snyder can pull off a seriously great Watchmen, then i gotta believe that making a good comic based movie, can't be as hard to do, as it seems. Simply because the Watchmen although a GN is a deep and compelling drama...100 Bullets might be the only series with more depth, and that could be debatable. Here's hoping against hope, that one of these guys can figure it out, and get it done right...not perfect...just done right...

Nicc on Apr 19, 2008


So, does this mean they will make an "Edward Norton Cut" for the DVD?

Jason on May 17, 2008


check out http://www.rejectionism.com

dick gozinya on May 19, 2008

New comments are no longer allowed on this post.



Subscribe to our feed -or- daily newsletter:
Follow Alex's main account on twitter:
For the latest posts only - follow this one:

Add our updates to your Feedly - click here

Get the latest posts sent in Telegram Telegram