Edward Norton is…

edwardnorton.jpg… the new Dr. Bruce Banner.

Or Dr. David Bruce Banner.

Or Dr. David Banner.

Either way, he’s the new Hulk.

I am probably one of the few people around these parts that really, really enjoyed Ang Lee’s The Hulk. Crazy, nonsensical ending aside, I thought that it did a great job of capturing the essence of the character. The Hulk is not about jumping far and smashing stuff real good (though those things are a lot of fun to watch), The Hulk is about inner turmoil. It’s about a man who does not know how to deal with childhood trauma. It’s about a man at war with himself. I thought Ang Lee did a fantastic job with that aspect of the character.

The problem is — most people only seemed to want to see The Hulk smash stuff. So with this new reboot of the franchise by director Louis Leterrier — the director of such cinema classics as The Transporter, Unleashed, and The Transporter 2 — that’s probably what the people are going to get. My only hope is that Edward Norton, who has a reputation for rewriting the scripts for the movies he is in, takes some artistic control of the film. I can’t imagine he’d star in something really hacky. I can hope, anyway.

Comments

  1. I am one of the few people who agree with you on Ang Lee’s Hulk. I loved it. I thought it was well acted, well directed, and the cinematography blew me away. I enjoyed Ang’s attmepts at creaitng a comic panel on screen, with the dual frames. The Hulk vs. absorbing man fight was way over the top I agree. It was cool to hear Banner say “you won’t like me when I’m angry” in Spanish at the end though.

    Also, I think Norton as Banner is brilliant casting. I like him much better than Bana, although I thought Bana was respectable in the role.

  2. I’m in total agreement with Conor. Ang Lee’s Hulk was really good, despite the fact that the ending didn’t make any sense.

    To hear this announcement is cool because I love Edward Norton, and I think he can capture a lot of Bruce Banner in terms of his turmoil and his smarts. I remember reading somewhere that the guy who is on that Prison Break show and was the bad guy in Blade: Trinity was originally rumored to be in the title role. Luckily, they went with Norton.

    My hope is that Leterrier isn’t going to make this hackey and stupid. Hulk is a great character when done right, and a complete snore when not. Watching him smash things was (will be cool) but there’s got to be a little soul in this picture too.

    Since they’ve picked Norton, my interest level has jumped ten fold. I just hope they keep those cool, “comic booky” transitions from the first movie.

  3. I love Bana. Bana is good in every shitty movie he’s in.

    But when I saw this, I said “NO SHIT!”

    And not in a bad way.

  4. Ed Norton. He’s the perfect choice. It’s almost too easy.

    casting director: We need someone to play Bruce Banner?
    idiot produce: Who’s that?
    c d: he’s a guy who has a split personality and one of them is really angry and hits stuff
    i p: well then just get Ed Norton.

    Primal Fear and Fight Club. Two movies where he’s already played a character with multiple personalities who hits things, this should be a walk in the park.

    Here’s hoping…

  5. Well, short of Steve Buschemi thats about perfect.

  6. I’ve said it before: Ed Norton has never done a bad movie.

    So this should be decent.

    The problem with The Hulk is that a mindless Hulk is fucking boring to watch; this is why I didn’t read the comics for years.

  7. Ed Norton and the director of The Transporter? I feel like I woke up in Crazy Land… and I like it here.

    When I saw the comic panel-evoking shots in Ang Lee’s movie, I said, “Say what you want about the story, but in a year everybody’s going to be copying this style.” Shows what I know.

  8. I liked the Ang Lee Hulk….

    but I don’t mind Ed Norton. I’m looking forward to it.

  9. I kind of liked the Ang Lee hulk… untill the ending which completly fucked me up.

  10. Okay, so we don’t even need a CGI Hulk now, just paint Norton Green and he can act all pissed like he did in Primal Fear. Either way AWESOME.

    I loved Bana and really was hoping he’d come back, and was pretty sure whoever they cast I’d be very “well, cool but…” this was the curve ball. I’m going to admit it, I wasn’t sure about Hulk 2: More Smash, but man, can’t wait now.

  11. I liked Bana too, and was against the idea of a new Hulk movie. I was against it until now. Ed Norton…very cool. Although I have always thought Norton would make a decent Dr. Doom.

  12. I’ve said it before: Ed Norton has never done a bad movie.

    I said Ed Norton’s never been bad in a movie. But never done a bad movie? He’s certainly had some sub par movies out there, such as:

    The Illusionist (meh)
    Kingdom of Heaven (cameo)
    Red Dragon (This was BAD)
    The Score (for a movie with Brando, DeNiro and Norton, this was not so good.)

  13. Kingdom of Heaven (cameo)

    The director’s cut on this is like an entirely new (and GOOD movie).

  14. Im all for Norton as Banner.

  15. this is huge! tyler durden is the hulk! i love norton and he could be really really good in this role. but the director of the transporter? that im not too sure of…. but hey, it did have good action and norton is a great actor (aside from the crap josh mentioned) so this fills me with hope.

    PS: The hulk was good, but too long and the ending was very brutal, you could hardly tell what was going on half the time (but it did have the hulk snapping a dog’s neck with his shoulder muscles!)

  16. The script for “The Incredible Hulk” was written by Zak Penn, who had a hand in crafting two “X-Men” films, “Fantastic Four” and “Elektra” for Marvel.

    THIS MAKE ME ANGRY!!! FANBOY SMASH!! FANBOY SMASH!!!

  17. Norton kind of anoy’s me. I don’t know why. He just seems like a punk or something. Maybe he’ll suprise me. I liked Banna (banana?). Anyway I hope they don’t try to use some live action muscle man to be the Hulk.

  18. Duuuude! Norton is one of my all time favs! Maybe cuz I look like him or maybe cuz he’s just so cool and talented (end of gushing).

    Anyways, awesome choice. This and the Downey’s pick as Ironman have gotten me interested in Marvel movie’s sooo much more than FF crappines. Hope the projects live up to both actor’s potential.

  19. Norton is perfect for this role!
    Is the Hulk gonna be huge and cg like in the last movie? I just hope this one has a plot, but I have never seen Norton in a plotless movie so I guess this has potential. Unleashed had a lot of inner turmoil and was actually pretty good while Transporter 2 was horrible.
    Norton was in kingdom of heaven?

  20. My guess would be that the new Hulk movie will feature a fully CG Hulk. I just don’t think modern audiences would buy a live human like they did in the TV show of yore. I’m sure too, they’ll be able to better integrate him into the movie. The first one definitely had some “cartoony” moments.

  21. The Illusionist (meh)
    Kingdom of Heaven (cameo)
    Red Dragon (This was BAD)
    The Score (for a movie with Brando, DeNiro and Norton, this was not so good.)

    I liked all of these movies and thought he was good in them. *shrug*

  22. Funny to see so many people coming out saying they liked Ang Lee’s Hulk movie…now.

    I kind of liked it too. I think it did suffer because the special effects made the Hulk look like something out of a Bugs Bunny cartoon (which is where many find fault with the film), but I think Lee was either out of his area of expertise on dealing with the CGI necessary, or there was bad production coordination with the people that did the effects (I think Lee said both things. Script and direction wise (other than the stretch purple pants on the cartoon character), I liked it. No wonder Ang Lee ran off to the simplicity of Brokeback Mountain (which I did not like, but I am not one for slow moving cowboy stories with people who mumble inaudibly).

    I don’t think they’ll screw up the special effect again on the Hulk– I think it’s pretty clear and commonly agreed that’s where they messed up. If the director and studio can get the CGI right, then it could be pretty good with Norton supplying a compelling Banner, which is the key. That was what made me like the old Bill Bixby TV show (is my age showing?). And I thought one of the best “emoting characters” with great range of expression recently was the latest King Kong. If they just do the SFX right, even in big green form he could be pretty good.

    I like Ed Norton too, and I thought the Illusionist was pretty good. I wasn’t expecting much, and I was out of range of any media commentary around it, so my expectatioins going in were nothing/low, as they were when I saw the Hulk by Ang Lee.

    That’s a good way to see a movie.

  23. Funny to see so many people coming out saying they liked Ang Lee’s Hulk movie…now.

    What’s even funnier is that the opinion on The Hulk here is overwhelmingly positive and on the forums… I don’t think even one person as said they liked it.

  24. I liked it in part. I think they tried to make a different kind of movie, but it ultimately didn’t succeed. I still respect that he tried (kinda like Grant Morrison.)

    I did think Bana was great, because Bana is always great. He’s always makes anything better.

    I also really dug the Hulk himself. Great CGI. Great rage. Good stuff. I don’t think they should change that all that much. But I wonder if they’ll have to go in a different direction just to distance the new movie from the old one.

  25. I tried to like the Hulk, but the Hulk dogs were ass.

    Visually the movie was fine. I dug the comic-book panels within the frame. And I agree Bana was really good. But, as often happens with comic-book movies, it is the little details (or sometimes the big ones) that broke it. When the army shot The Hulk down and he fell into the foothills of the desert, the general was all “Good job, mission accomplished. Come back to base.” Huh? Oh yeah, don’t send a crew out to retreive him or anything. Ugh. I let out a talksplode at that point.

    Also, I didn’t like the Nolte as bad father piece of the story. I get that they were trying to make Banner’s story more personal, rather than accidental, but it didn’t ring true to me.

  26. Also, I didn’t like the Nolte as bad father piece of the story. I get that they were trying to make Banner’s story more personal, rather than accidental, but it didn’t ring true to me.

    But… that’s the whole basis of the Hulk – his abusive father. That’s where Banner’s rage comes from.

  27. But… that’s the whole basis of the Hulk – his abusive father. That’s where Banner’s rage comes from.

    But you know without the absorbing man shit…

  28. But… that’s the whole basis of the Hulk – his abusive father. That’s where Banner’s rage comes from.

    But you know without the absorbing man shit…

  29. Well, that must have been a story arc I missed. To me, it’s all about the original story. Banner is an ultra-nerd. Even his fellow nerdy scientists make fun of him. But it’s the act of compassion for Rick jones that ends him up being all green and mad. Where did the story of his dad some into play?

  30. The abuse he sufferd at his father is the reason for his supressed rage

  31. ok, I’m back from Wiki. I get it, but I’m not thrilled with it. On one hand I can see why David wanted to add a backstory to explain the fracture in Banner’s mind. On the other hand, I liked the mysterious split personality, the raging id that was unleashed at night (in the beginning) or in times of intense emotion. I think the story has more power that way.

  32. WOW. I can’t believe that everybody is so positive or nuetral about THE HULK. Not to say that anybody is wrong.

    You have your opinions and I have mine. And mine is that THE HULK SUCKED WAY WAY HARD.

    Sorry Conor. Not to insult anybody but its just that I was in pain 45mins. Into that movie. I love long movies. I can sit through a good drama for hours, but I need substance. I just felt like i was watching the most boring film ever. And the Hulk Smash stuff can only go for so long without getting monotonous(yes we know he can pick up a tank, we know missiles can’t hurt him get on with it).

    But back with the topic, I think Edward Norton is a great choice for Bruce Banner. He Has the look and he’s a great actor. And I’m glad that they have a new director.

  33. “I liked it in part. I think they tried to make a different kind of movie, but it ultimately didn’t succeed. I still respect that he tried (kinda like Grant Morrison.)”

    This is exactly what I felt about the first movie, except that I liked it, I thought it succeeded for me (for me). One thing I think they did not try to do was please Hulk comics fans. In that (not pleasing Hulk comics fans) they succeeded tremendously. Getting more quality/artistic vision type directors on films rather than Hollywood hacks will always run this risk – the “non-hack” director will be tempted to his own take on something, and then, “HULK fandom SMASH puny DIRECTOR!”

    Here’s somthing amusing – while people here nitpick on Hulk backstory stuff (and there have been many iterations of the character since), think about Nolan’s Batman Begins — that film skated all over the edge of accepted Bat Canon with regard to how Batman came to be and all that (and I mean daring to go well beyond just “his parents were shot”). Nolan and Goyer added and ignored and changed tons of stuff, but fans and everybody loved it (myself included).

    CGI: OK, so Norton plays Banner, who plays HULK? That’s the question:

    Part of the Hulk CGI problem was that he was not well blended with the background and/or live actors. When he is jumping across the desert, or maybe even fighting some missles or creature (and liked those bits) it works, but when he’s standing on a street next to people, he starts to look more CGI creation (or just a big cartoon) “inserted” into the frame, the face looks cartoonish compared to the live actors, and that can take a person out of a movie. Like those old King Kong movies when the girl is in the giant mechanical hand. You’re supposed to be watching the girl in a giant Gorilla’s hand, instead, you are very aware you are watching a girl in a giant stage prop. This is where the Hulk CGI had many problems.

    They need to do what they did with King Kong, with the motion censor suit, and get a talented actor to play the hulk in the suit. The guy who played Gollum and King Kong was as responsible for the wonderful personality of those two characters, and that element was DEFINITELY missing from the Hulk.

    So, in the new movie, Banner becomes Hulk, repressed rage, great — but can the Big Green Guy have some range of personality too? I think that’s the ticket to getting a lot more people on board with the Hulk.

  34. i can only speak for myself, and i am in no way trying to bash anyone on the forum, but the first HULK movie was terrible. there were far too many story arcs and not near enough substance.

    i actually thought the CG was pretty good (Nolte’s Absorbing Man as he discovers his powers), not great, but better than the FF flick. Ang Lee is given too much credit and the comic panel technique devalued an honest attempt at a fun character.

    Eric Bana couldn’t act his way out of a paper bag.

    Ed Norton is a brilliant choice. Salud.

    why does the HULK even need to look real? he sure didn’t look like Banner in his first appearance. he should be extremely stylized and look like a disgusting green monster. thats why people were so afraid of him. the HULK is rage personified, he should look the part.