Norton vs. Marvel over "Hulk"

• email this story
• read comments (39)
• post a comment
• 
  
  

Edward Norton is reportedly fighting with Marvel's chairman David Maisel and production prexy Kevin Feige over the final shape and tone of The Incredible Hulk. Quelle surprise! Norton has been getting into post-production scraps off and on for ten years now, starting with American History X. He'll always be a collaborator and never just "an actor for hire" -- and anyone who hires him knows this. Besides -- arguing over a film's final cut is a very healthy way to go. Better that than an atmosphere of complacency and mutual masturbation.

comment #1

tophertilson says ...

In this case, he's a credited writer, no?

comment #2

Dave says ...

I wouldn't be surprised if Marvel's terrified at the possibility that Norton will pull an Ang Lee and make the Hulk smarter than it needs to be, i.e. inaccessible to the dumb kids who just want to see Hulk smash.

That said, the trouble with Ang Lee's Hulk was that it wasn't really any *good*. And let's be honest, there aren't a whole lot of kids out there screaming for the Hulk (after the holy superhero troika of Superman/Batman/Spiderman, the Hulk is waaay down the totem poll of cool in 2008, especially after Lee's movie).

At least Lee's movie gave us the best Nick Nolte "WTF was THAT?!?" performance in years.

comment #3

Colin says ...

Yeah, he's the credited writed. Zak Penn wrote the initial screenplay, but when Norton came aboard, he rewrote the entire thing.

comment #4

Geoff says ...

This is starting to get ridiculous. He was allowed to re-write the script. His reputation should be no surprise.

At this point it makes it sound like he's just an actor doing his thing and then his ego start to Hulk out.

comment #5

BurmaShave says ...

Edward Norton is not Dustin Hoffman. He's not even Phillip Seymour Hoffman. He needs to lighten up, and starting working a lot more, because he still pretty far away from being a great actor. If he think he's this much of a triple threat he needs to start directing. MOTHERLESS BROOKLYN would be a great fit, get it off the ground.

comment #6

Mgmax says ...

Yeah, Dave, two Hulk movies is already at least one more than we needed. It's a dumb character, Ang Lee (who's never met a movie he couldn't make too long and not as effective as it seems like it should be) turned it into a parody by having Hulk bounce off the planet. This one might be better, hey, Star Trek II is better than Star Trek I, but still, who NEEDS a frickin' Hulk movie?

comment #7

Rothchild says ...

Hulk is the fourth most well known superhero in America. What else do you need to know? I'm not making this shit up.

comment #8

Colin says ...

The actors are already signed for two sequels to this new one if the first one doe4s well enough.

comment #9

Noah says ...

Burma, he already directed a movie. You don't remember the masterpiece that was Keeping the Faith?

I think based on his performances in American History X, Primal Fear, Larry Flynt and Fight Club, I was hoping for great things from Mr. Norton. I thought he could be the next Brando. Truthfully though, he hasn't turned in a stunning performance since 25th Hour. The Illusionist, Down in the Valley and the Painted Veil were all okay, but I don't see that same fire from him. I think doing a Hulk movie is a waste of his talent to begin with and he seems to go against his anti-corporate and anti-Hollywood principles, but if you sign up to do a 150 million dollar flick and get paid god knows how much to act in it and write it, then you need to step aside. This movie is never going to be Fight Club, you know?

comment #10

Josh Massey says ...

Norton looks like he's about to break into song.

comment #11

vansmith says ...

Hulk of shit is more like it. That cartoon shit was embarrassing, the tv series was ok. they need a real actor or something to play the guy...

comment #12

Edward says ...

How much fun must he have had writing that great dialogue, "Hulk, smash! Grrrrr."

At least with a CG Hulk you don't have the actor asking, "Like, what's my motivation?"

comment #13

Breedlove says ...

Norton actually popped into my head yesterday because he's the one celebrity who I can recall being a vocal Eliot Spitzer supporter. I was reading some interview with him a year or so ago, maybe for The Illusionist or something, where he went out of his way to rave about Spitzer...but Noah's right, we've had this discussion here before: Norton has had a strange and fairly disppointing career over the past decade after it looked like he was going to be the next Dustin Hoffman and get nominated for Best Actor every other year. It seems like he should be working on better stuff with bigger directors.

comment #14

The Winchester says ...

"Norton actually popped into my head yesterday because he's the one celebrity who I can recall being a vocal Eliot Spitzer supporter"

Maybe norton is client #10?

comment #15

T. Holly says ...

Maybe he's had an alt cut running in the room next door.

comment #16

Richardson says ...

"but still, who NEEDS a frickin' Hulk movie?"

By that logic, why bother making any movie ever? Who needs more movies?

"(after the holy superhero troika of Superman/Batman/Spiderman, the Hulk is waaay down the totem poll of cool in 2008, especially after Lee's movie)"

I'm confused. If 'Hulk' made the character less cool in the eyes of kids, then how can you say that Superman is still cool in the eyes of the same kids? I don't know any kids that liked 'Superman Returns'.

I say again, Omar fights The Hulk in this movie. That alone makes me more excited for it than any other summer blockbuster this year.

comment #17

christian says ...

This movie will rule ONLY if they keep this theme exactly as written:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dj26N10Ymlg

comment #18

lazarus says ...

I disagree with Noah (and others) that Norton hasn't done anything worthwhile since 25th Hour. He had a very moving, uncredited turn in Kingdom Of Heaven, and did so behind a mask, without ever showing his face.

It may sound like I'm not being serious, but I really thought he elevated the film, and it's unfortunate the role isn't mentioned more often.

comment #19

Mgmax says ...

""but still, who NEEDS a frickin' Hulk movie?"
By that logic, why bother making any movie ever? Who needs more movies?"

By that logic, why bother making anything BUT comic book movies? Who needs There Will Be Blood or Once or The Lives of Others?

comment #20

Breedlove says ...

Lazarus, good point. That was a good performance. I liked 'Down in the Valley' a lot too...it just seemed like he was gonna be a real A-list guy, getting really juicy parts. I though he would be headlining Ridley Scott movies as opposed to taking an uncredited cameo. (The term cameo isn't fair, I know, but you get the idea).

comment #21

Richardson says ...

"By that logic, why bother making anything BUT comic book movies? Who needs There Will Be Blood or Once or The Lives of Others?"

You're the one who's arguing that a movie shouldn't exist because you're not interested in it, buddy. Don't pin that shit on me.

comment #22

T. Holly says ...

And where's Louis Leterrier in all this? Why doesn't Ed become a showrunner on a tv series if he wants to be the tie breaker / final cutter. This ain't reality tv / doc making writing/shaping preditor (producer/editor) style, it's filmmaking director-editor producer hammer style.

comment #23

D.Z. says ...

Dave: "I wouldn't be surprised if Marvel's terrified at the possibility that Norton will pull an Ang Lee and make the Hulk smarter than it needs to be, i.e. inaccessible to the dumb kids who just want to see Hulk smash."

Guess you haven't heard of Grey Hulk.

Mgmax: "It's a dumb character,"

See above.

"Ang Lee (who's never met a movie he couldn't make too long and not as effective as it seems like it should be)"

I'll only agree with you on Brokeback Mountain, because I haven't seen his 90s work.

vansmith: My pick would be Gerard Butler.

comment #24

MilkMan says ...

Why would anyone, i.e., A-List Directors, want to work with this asshole anymore? He doesn't open a movie, his critical cache is as low as it's ever been, and, apparently, when he looks in the mirror, he still sees the face and body of Tyler Durden staring back at him. And if Ed is such a goddmaned genius, then how the come the film he directed is so profoundly and utterly mediocre? I used to kind of like watching Ed Norton and now there is something that makes me dislike him. I think the fact that he used to ball Courtney Love says that there is something profoundly icky about him, I don't care that he used to date Salma Hayek, although he was banging Evan Rachel Wood for a while, so I guess he's cool. I'll be first in line for the Hulk. Go, Ed, Go!

comment #25

Noah says ...

Lazarus, while I'll accept your point, you must admit that his extended cameo in Kingdom of Heaven isn't exactly what you had in mind for the man who gave us that unbelievable performance in American History X. I'll accept that it was a decent performance, but it's not in the pantheon of all-time great performances like his one AMX, Fight Club or (and I might be alone on this) 25th Hour. His extended cameo in Kingdom of Heaven just isn't in the same ballpark as those three, in my opinion.

comment #26

MASON says ...

Norton wants to rewrite every script that gets offered to him. And by "rewriting" I mean he wants to change his character slightly and his dialogue and then tell the press he wrote the whole thing from scratch.

comment #27

BurmaShave says ...

lazarus, major good call on KINGDOM OF HEAVEN, I'd totally forgotten. Fantastic. That's the side I want to see more of.

comment #28

Mgmax says ...

"You're the one who's arguing that a movie shouldn't exist because you're not interested in it, buddy."

Well, since I'm not in a position of power over this movie, I wouldn't worry your head about it too much, but I stand by what I said: who the hell needs another movie about a guy whose temper turns him into an angry artichoke that can swing tanks over his head? Is this really a theme that needed so much additional explication that one film simply wasn't enough to do it justice?

comment #29

D.Z. says ...

Mgmax: You have a point. But I think if the guy has a decent adversary in this one, it'd make for a more engaging experience than the last film.

comment #30

Dublin101 says ...

"It seems like he should be working on better stuff with bigger directors".

Yes but bigger directors are unlikely to be interested in an egotistic actor who has a track record of overstepping his boundaries. A director would be weary of been forced by a studio or a producer to reshape their films so they would be weary of a meddler like Norton.

Although I presume that Spike Lee and David Fincher had enough clout for Norton not to try to take over their respective films with him. He probably only gets way with reshaping films to his liking that when he’s working with newer directors who have less clout.

comment #31

Gnome de Guerre says ...

Mgmax, there's no more to explore with the Hulk than there is with Superman, Batman, Spider-Man, zombies, vampires, James Bond, nannies, etc...

In other words, it's a concept. It's what the filmmakers do with it that determines whether there's a point to it or not. Whether it's a superhero movie, a rom-com, a Bond film, a Bourne film -- whatever -- every "concept" has potential to be great, elevate the genre, or just be plain entertaining. Or to suck. There's nothing inherently less interesting about the Hulk. In fact, the Hulk's been around for what, 50 years more or less? Apparently it's been a reliable vehicle for storytellers.

comment #32

Joel says ...

The only reason I'm interested in this one is because of Norton. They should listen to his input, especially since he wrote the thing.

comment #33

Chinaski says ...

I don't know how people still keep bringing up American History X when talking about Norton's "bad rep"...considering Tony fucking Kaye was involved.

comment #34

Mgmax says ...

I dunno, Gnome, I could probably argue that there is more meat in most of those (if they really do up World War Z, for instance, it'll be a great allegory for the War on Terror), but probably I'm just being cranky. Even by comic book standards, the Hulk has always seemed particularly silly to me, but that could just be me. Evidently it is.

comment #35

MickTravis says ...

Ang Lee (who's never met a movie he couldn't make too long and not as effective as it seems like it should be)

Mgmax, I hope this means you haven't seen "The Ice Storm," which is exactly as long as it should be and couldn't (nay, shouldn't) be any more effective than it is. It's a masterpiece.

comment #36

ellenmiss says ...

Hey,, Why so many people keeps saying they saw you before on a celebrity and millioniare dating site like " wealthydater. com". Is that true?

comment #37

MickTravis says ...

It is ellenmiss, yes, is why I am sexy available hot and rich. You date?

comment #38

DavidF says ...

The redesign looks pretty good but it's already crashed my Firefox twice.

As others have said, Hulk is basically an empty vessel and if someone pours in the right thing, it could be good. Who knows?

I think Norton is immensely talented but unfocussed or something else the last few years...he should be in consideration for acting awards each year and he seems to just fade in to the background. So, you did Red Dragon for the paycheque and did Courtney Love for the heck of it, but what else do you got?

comment #39

Gnome de Guerre says ...

On second thought... http://www.mtv.com/overdrive/?id=1583143&vid=215625

Compare it with trailers for Ang Lee's version and this one seems colorless, straightforward, and uninspired. Compare it with the Speed Racer or Iron Man trailers and it looks almost downright boring. I hope to be surprised!

Post a Comment