Meglos

How about this guy for Bruce Banner?



Whedon's well known for casting friends in projects anyway...

Artman

I just find casting changes distracting, regardless if I think the replacement is better or not. The potential quality of the film isn't at question, but obviously the continuity and believability of the world they're trying to create won't be as good.

devilshalo

Just glad they won't go with an unknown. At least they are replacing a caliber actor with another caliber actor.

dx23

I like Phoenix but he is certainly not Bruce Banner. A guy like Casey Affleck would be better suited for the role.

RocShemp

Edward Norton Releases Statement About Marvel’s Casting Decisions for The Avengers



As always, he's a classy guy.

devilshalo

It's too bad Kevin Feige couldn't have been as gracious.

Patman

Norton made Feige look very puny with a classy response.

anomynous

Norton's was nice and respectful, and Feige came off like an asshole. I'd say that's enough for somebody to judge them on this situation.


*still holding out hope for Norton to come on stage at Comic-Con*

fumanstan

As always? From what i've heard, it's because he wasn't a classy guy (in more then one instance) that a lot of this got started.

I love Norton as an actor, but I don't really get the picture that he's he's an innocent actor that just wants to perform but the big bad studio won't give him a chance.

GreenVulture

Until he disagrees with you on how to make a movie.

JumpCutz

So Norton is out because they didn't show him enough cash?

I suppose that's the obvious answer.

kstublen

I'm disappointed by Norton being replaced. I liked him as Banner and though the did a great job with the character. More than that though, I just hate seeing cast members replaced in ongoing franchises. First they did it with Rhodes, and that was annoying, and now they're doing it with Banner, which will also be annoying. It's not the end of the world, but it really takes me out of the movie and the entire time I keep thinking to myself "This should have been so-and-so."

I read the stuff about Norton being difficult while filming and promoting The Incredible Hulk, but when you are as invested in the movie as Norton was I can understand voicing your frustration to the studio heads about the final cut. I imagine it was more of him defending his vision of the film and it was spun out of control by there. There's a difference between trying to get the best possible movie made and just being difficult for difficult-sake. I think Norton was in the former category.

And the difference between The Incredible Hulk and The Avengers is that Norton was the main character in The Incredible Hulk and was directly involved in the writing process. He had more at stake and more invested in that film. There wouldn't be that same dynamic in The Avengers.

Norton's response came across as classy whereas Feige's statement came across as underhanded and accusatory. It was as though Feige anticipated the backlash he would receive for recasting Norton and did a preemptive attack on Norton. I really doubt that Norton was going to cause problems for Whedon and the rest of the cast and crew...he's probably the most professional of the group, at least as far as the actors are concerned.

devilshalo

Had Feige not made the backhanded comments and kept it to a simple "thank you for your work with us", I wouldn't have to judge him. Norton came away looking gracious for the opportunity he had.

GreenVulture

It's not his vision; it is Marvel's vision. I think some people here are failing to recognize the fact that Norton is simply a cog in the giant machine that is Paramount/Marvel's billion dollar-plus Avengers franchise. If that cog was being difficult earlier, it's better to get rid of it now rather than wonder if you'll have the same problem down the road. If Norton thought Marvel and Paramount would just step aside and let him take over in the post-production process, then he's dumber than I thought.

Besides, the latest Hulk movie was a dull, dull effort with mediocre action and a lead actor, who for all his talk of being a passionate fan, looked bored out of his skull. While there were flaws in Ang Lee's version, Bana's performance was not one of them; hell, even Bill Bixby was a more interesting Banner. Removing Norton is probably for the best.

kstublen

Except that Norton wasn't just one of the actors, but was actively involved in the writing and tone of the movie. Being so involved, it was partly his vision. Norton and Leterrier had problems with the final cut and wanted different things included. They wanted more character development and a longer movie, Marvel wanted a shorter movie that was all action with much less substance. He didn't just come in during post-production and try and take over, but was involved from the start and maintained involvement until the end, trying to get the movie that not only he, but the director, wanted made.

And as I said before, just because he did this for the first movie doesn't mean he would do it for the ensemble piece. And if he was so problematic during The Incredible Hulk, why have they just now announced his replacement after holding talks with him and negotiating his involvement? Clearly they wanted him back originally and something changed...and it wasn't his behaviour in the past that changed.

Supermallet

I'm confused. The Hulk is a lot heavier than Bruce Banner. How can you respect The Hulk and even prefer him over Banner?

Hokeyboy

I want Jeff Goldblum in the role.

Supermallet

The way you keep going after Ed Norton, I'd almost think you're Feige himself.

GreenVulture

Except Leterrier/Norton aren't the ones who stand to lose millions if the film doesn't do well. The Avengers is going to be a money-making machine for many years, and Paramount/Marvel wisely do not want anyone or anything disrupting the status quo. Audiences were expecting a by-the-numbers action movie with a green giant tearing shit up and that's basically what they got; Universal tried to make a character-driven Hulk film seven years ago and lots of people responded negatively (not me, though; for all its problems--and there are quite a few--I really enjoyed Ang Lee's version). It sounds like this problem could have easily been avoided if Letterier/Norton and Marvel/Paramount sat down together and clearly stated what each wanted from the final product and tried to find a happy medium before anything was shot.

Who knows? Neither of us were privy to the negotiations, so all we can do is speculate. Maybe he didn't like the amount of money being offered or the size of his role. Maybe he wanted to have a hand in the development, or wanted a lucrative back-end deal. Whatever it was, it must've pissed off Marvel enough to sever ties with him and release a snippy press statement that basically says he is an uncooperative ass.

Like I said earlier, this is Marvel's baby, and they have the final word, not Norton, Letterier, Favreau, Downey, Whedon, Branagh or whoever the hell they hired to direct Captain America. And if anyone involved with these movies is smart at all, they'll know this and play accordingly.

JumpCutz

Ugh. Talk about a flatlined performance, when Norton turns it off, be barely registers (The Italian Job too).

I don't think it's a deal breaker, but it sure would have been nice to have him
continue in the Banner role.

project86

Well there goes the "unknown" for banner if they're looking at phoenix.

JumpCutz

I'd prefer Ben Foster in the Banner role if they're going to replace Norton.

Patman

If you wanted to go a little older, Sharlto Copley is an option. If you wanted to go younger, Joseph Gordon-Levitt is an option for the Bruce Banner role.

Supermallet

Sharlto Copley.
Joaquin Phoenix

Solid Snake

Yeah, Copley has the build for Banner for sure.