So why did Edward Norton not do The Avengers? - The Incredible Hulk (2008) Discussion

[–] David_Blue 13 years ago

Nobody knows. Neither Marvel nor Norton has explained.

I'm guessing when I say that Edward Norton's failure to promote The Incredible Hulk (2008) might have something to do with it. Ultimately, you are supposed to stifle whatever negative feelings you have and help sell the movie.

reply

[–] gljbradley 13 years ago

I agree. I never understood why or what that happened. It's just a shame and The Avengers looks like it's going to be too congested with all the characters and situations smack together.

reply

[–] jasir_arafat 13 years ago

so why isnt eric bana doing it. he is a good actor, deserrves a second chance

reply

[–] hulk67 13 years ago

Eric doesn't portray Bruce Banner very well nor did Edward Norton. I couldn't understand why they were picked. They are high profile actors, but it doesn't mean they can portray Bruce Banner. I couldn't see Bruce Banner in the Hulk films they did.

Better keep them out.

reply

[–] kardplayer-1 12 years ago

I strongly disagree. Eric Bana sucked because he is a bad actor and because Ang Lee could not direct the school play. Ed Norton was the best Bruce Banner ever. I say that even though I loved the Bill Bixby Bruce Banner. (Let's hear it for alliteration!) Norton is one of my favorite actors. On the other hand, the Hulk was never one of my Marvel Comic faves, so I did not start with a lot of preconceived ideas about what Banner should be like.

reply

[–] mdelvecchio 12 years ago

ang lee can't direct? riiiight. you must have been in grade school when he won 4 academies for Crouching Tiger, a film with subtitles. how about Brokeback Mountain?

reply

[–] Denders_ 12 years ago

Eric Bana a bad actor?

Go see Chopper and if u still think the same ur obviously mad.

reply

[–] Gustav_Fiers 12 years ago

No, just an underwhelming Bruce Banner.

reply

[–] astindextor 8 years ago

Bill Bixby never played Bruce Banner. He played David Banner.

reply

[–] Hostle17 12 years ago

"so why isnt eric bana doing it. he is a good actor, deserrves a second chance"

I would have preferred they bring Bana back over a new actor. It would have added some sense of continuity. In an ideal world they could have gotten Norton back, but if they really were dead set against working with him again, I'd have preferred the return of Bana.

There are some who hate the '03 Hulk so much that they want to cut all ties to it and pretend it doesn't exist. Well, love the film or hate the film, Bana was not the problem. The problems were in the script and/or directing. It's simply not fair to take it out on the actor. Also, while some fans want to believe that Incredible Hulk was a pure reboot, it really wasn't. It was more of a 'loose sequel'. Zack Penn's original draft of the Incredible Hulk script was pure sequel, and it was only in re-writes that it started to get semi-rebooty. The film still feels very sequelish, though.

-BM

reply

[–] amcelholm 11 years ago

I agree. Sometimes a director is just wrong for a movie. Ang Lee is a superb director, but the Hulk just didn't work and you have to lay most of the blame with Lee, he made it very dull and serious. A great director no doubt, but this movie didn't work with him.

I agree about Bana, I think he's a great actor. He was superb in Chopper and Munich in particular.

reply

[–] purple66 10 years ago

The '03 Hulk isn't set within the same continuity as anything in the MCU.

reply

[–] michaelrene 12 years ago

how do you feel about it now:-)

reply

[–] Monkey_Stew 13 years ago

I re watched this yesterday for the first time in a while, and I had forgotten how much I like this movie. It makes me wish so much more that Norton was doing the Avengers and eventual TIH sequels. I hope Ruffalo is good, but Norton was great, and half the fun of an Avengers movie is seeing all the characters and their actors together.

youtube.com/grapejuicepictures

reply

[–] capt-lunatic 13 years ago

I remember Norton was very excited for the Avengers and he said he has some "great ideas and could be a real help in the editing process." Like a week later the producers announced they'd be replacing him.

Keith David>David Keith

reply

[–] juggernaut_kennybadger 13 years ago

i cant remember where but I read marvel choose not to use him due to they didnt want to pay so many big named actors for the avengers movie

Portia Perez Fan

reply

[–] jasir_arafat 13 years ago

this is an even bigger argument for bana. he certainly isnt as expensive as ruffalo. the heck his name almost sound like banner

reply

[–] veensepeper 13 years ago

Bana is not as expensive as Ruffalo, because he's not that good an actor.

Besides the re-use of Bana will confuse people. They might think there's a connection to the Avengers and Ang Lee's failure.

reply

[–] akb_00131984 13 years ago

During production of TIH, Norton and Marvel came to blows over some scenes. Most of which can be viewed as the deleted scenes of the DVD/ Blu-Ray. Norton felt that the studio was interfering even before a cut of the film had been produced, plus I think Norton was filming a few films during promotion for TIH (as a way of perhaps getting back at Marvel).

From that I feel that Marvel wanted someone who wasn't as much of a leader as Norton was on TIH (rewrote the script, etc) and someone who was more inclined to do as he was told.

"My name is Lt. Aldo Raine"

reply

[–] Hostle17 12 years ago

"Besides the re-use of Bana will confuse people. They might think there's a connection to the Avengers and Ang Lee's failure."

Well, there kind of is....

-BM

reply

[–] Norse_Sage 12 years ago

No, there isn't. Not in the slighest.
Bruce Krenzler (not Banner!), as played by Eric Bana, has exactly zero realtion to the MCU.

Tesla was robbed!

reply

[–] FutureVessel 12 years ago

I remember Norton was very excited for the Avengers and he said he has some "great ideas and could be a real help in the editing process." Like a week later the producers announced they'd be replacing him.

That's probably the whole problem, he can't just let other people do their jobs and constantly steps on their toes.

reply

[–] Nobody_Gives_A_Damn 12 years ago

I remember Norton was very excited for the Avengers and he said he has some "great ideas and could be a real help in the editing process." Like a week later the producers announced they'd be replacing him.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's probably the whole problem, he can't just let other people do their jobs and constantly steps on their toes.
--------------------------------------
Totally agree with this sentiment. He's an actor paid to do a role. Surely he must read a script before accepting a role, if he wants to change things and do his own thing then no wonder marvel are reluctant to continue the relationship. It can't be very fair on his co stars aswell if they too have read the scripts and then find that things are altered on the whim of one actor. Nortons a great actor, but I won't miss him at all in any further Marvel productions.

Keef, trying to make sense out of chaos!

reply

[–] Gustav_Fiers 12 years ago

As much as I love Norton I have to agree with that. He was getting a bit too big for his boots.

reply

[–] JSerrano1201 12 years ago

Just like in entourage

reply

[–] eifler121 12 years ago

I heard that Robert Downey Jr. did that with Iron Man as well. I heard that it was so bad he re-wrote almost every scene.

reply

[–] lilchicklet-1 11 years ago

Nope. In RE: to Iron man - the script wasn't finished when they started shooting, so a TON of Downey's lines were several takes of improvisation. So much so that Paltrow had a hard time keeping up with him because she never knew what he was going to say next.

I'm sure they had a general script, but they funny/stark personality showing stuff was a lot of Downey's work. I think he had a heavy hand in a lot of the work because he's so good and he and Favreau are buds.
And no one said Norton's work was unwarranted. He is an actor but if he has a good idea, he could mention it. He doesn't have the ultimate say so. I don't find that writers are often pushed around by actors. Actors may demand money, but everyone usually has great respect for the writers.

reply

[–] eifler121 11 years ago

I feel like the success of Iron Man hinges entirely on Robert Downy Jr., while Incredible Hulk seemed like a gamble. I don't think it was promoted very well in the wake of Iron Man and The Dark Knight

reply

[–] Darkfalz1979 12 years ago

Norton wants his interpretation of the character, which acts just like him. He's not interested in the screenwriter or director's interpretation of the character.

He sucks and is 100% the reason this was the biggest flop of the Marvel Universe movies.

reply

[–] christina-1995 11 years ago

Do you mean every character, or just bruce banner?

reply

[–] skoobydoo6789 8 years ago

I have to agree.

If it's all the same to you, I'll have that drink now.-Loki (Marvel's Avengers)

reply

[–] MandyOne 13 years ago

apparently because edward norton was unbearable in production. He and the director got on, but the two of them didn't get along with the producers/studio. marvel is very much my way or the highway when it comes to their film franchises so they didn't take kindly to an actor attempting to rewrite the film. then of course he backed out of promotions which is obnoxious too because he was the biggest name on the bill. ha the fact that he said "he is excited and has a lot of ideas" sounds like a sarcastic insult against marvel since that's what caused the falling out in the first place.

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] moviemonkey81 13 years ago

Like most things, I doubt it was just one thing that ruined the Marvel deal. Norton has shown on more than one occasion that he can be difficult during filming. Too much of a control freak. American History X and The Italian Job are good examples. It was so bad on AHX that the original director tried to remove himself from the credits; Norton had scenes reedited to increase his screen time, as well as rewrote scenes during filming, like in Hulk.

Marvel wants top tier actors involved with their projects and will pay for them. However, the official word from Norton himself, Marvel was not willing to pay his top dollar, which had grown since TIH. Couple that with Norton’s behind the scenes difficulty and controlling nature, he basically wasn’t worth the money.

IMO, Ruffalo is a better choice for Banner. Don’t get me wrong, I like Norton and most of his movies, but he never really felt like Banner for me.

When you’re in a bad mood, just think about a monkey.

reply

[–] hulk67 13 years ago

Hey I am with you on this..

He never felt like banner to me!

reply

[–] SeanJoyce 12 years ago

moviemonkey:

American History X and The Italian Job are good examples.

The Italian Job is not a good example because it's an entirely different story. Norton made it very clear that he wanted nothing to do with the film, but Paramount forced him into it because of a contractual obligation.

I have not heard any stories of Norton acting out of turn on The Italian Job, either during filming or after. However, I would be interested to hear what other crew members felt about working with a guy who was very vocal about his unwillingness to participate.

"...if that was off, I'd be whoopin' your ass up and down this street." ~ an irate Tarantino

reply

[–] moviemonkey81 12 years ago

SeanJoyce

I have not heard any stories of Norton acting out of turn on The Italian Job

Mark Wahlberg, Charlize Theron, and Seth Green (and even Donald Sutherland I think) mentioned how difficult Norton was onset. Not with production, but with everyone. I remember some people trying to defend him by saying he was just method acting, playing the bad guy part and staying in character all the time. I don't buy it, and neither did the actors.

I think this was posted on Dark Horizons during filming of The Italian Job.

When you’re in a bad mood, just think about a monkey.

reply

[–] ghostwolf1978 11 years ago

All I want to know is why people think Norton or Bana didn't "feel" like Banner.

How exactly should Bruce Banner be portrayed ?

From the few comics I read, the 70s TV series and the Avengers movie, my opinion is that he's supposed to be quiet and serious. I could never read much else than that about his persona, aside from he gets angry quickly.

I'd like to point out that I'm about to watch Norton's Hulk and have never seen Bana's (I will watch this soon too).

So people...answer the question please. :)

reply

[–] croat-hr 7 years ago

I agree that Norton is a jerk sometimes, and sometimes scripts just don't need his constant rewritings and nagging.
BUT - he actually saved American History X. It's a great movie now.
I've read original director's ideas, and they sucked.
One of them was that Norton's character Derrek is going trough yet another character change in the final scene, and he shaves his head again.
That would be just dumb, the first character change (Derrek realising that maybe it's not ok to hate other people just for their race) was done purposelly and took a lot of screen time to explain it.
Another 180% character change just to make the movie seem more powerfull in the last scene, is non believable, and would ruin the film.
Another scene that Norton included and was not in the original script, was a dinner scene with his father, when he was a kid.
That scene is great, explains a lot of why things are like they are in the movie, and it would be worse without it.
So, yes, he actually saved the film from mediocrity to greatness.

reply

[–] daniell san 13 years ago

you can read the reasons according to marvel and norton's agent here:

http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/103715-no-edward-norton-for -the-avengers

reply

[–] Gustav_Fiers 13 years ago

See this just makes me really disappointed to know Norton is so humble about it and he wanted to do it.

reply

[–] upstreamtuna 13 years ago

Edward Norton didn't do a follow up in "The Avengers" because of difficulties with Marvel.

He came on Incredible Hulk only if he could re-write the screenplay and more things to it.

Which he did. And Marvel decided that what he added made the film too long (135-145 minutes). Norton was pissed at this and got no credit for the things that were in his script left in the film (the conversations with the man on the computer, Banner finding the serum in the Amazon), instead, Zack Penn wrote to the WGA and they gave him all the credit for the screenplay.

So in short, he did not want to work with Marvel again due to creative differences...

"Are you gonna' bark all day little doggy, or are you gonna' bite?"

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] David_Blue 13 years ago

crh_2010: "For all the people here claiming that norton was "hard to work with" then why hire him?"

Because he is very good, as he has proved many times.

But in retrospect, if Mark Ruffalo is good and stays the course it would have been better to hire him all along.

reply

[–] koffeenkreame41-1 12 years ago

I agree, Norton is an excellent actor. I personally thought he was great in here. I loved this movie and it's pretty messed up that he isn't in The Avengers. I remember he said he was excited about doing it and they announced he wasn't gonna be in it. Sucks. Even though I do think Ruffalo is a good actor and I think he will do great in the role. I think it sucks that they recasted yet ANOTHER actor to play Bruce Banner.

"I am the ultimate badass, you do not wanna `*beep*` wit' me!" Hudson in Aliens.

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] David_Blue 12 years ago

We now know that everyone who had high hopes for Mark Ruffalo was justified and predictions of cheesy doom were falsified.

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] David_Blue 12 years ago

Acknowledging that what your eyes see is not what you expected doesn't make you a loser, it makes you observant.

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] SeanJoyce 12 years ago

upstreamtuna:

So in short, he did not want to work with Marvel again due to creative differences...

Despite the differences that occurred on the first film, Norton was very eager to return for The Avengers. It was Marvel that didn't want any part of that arrangement...

"...if that was off, I'd be whoopin' your ass up and down this street." ~ an irate Tarantino

reply

[–] jackson-219 12 years ago

From some accounts Norton is really serious about his craft and sometimes goes over some details OVER and OVER even sometimes changing dialogue on the scene while shooting so I'm guessing it's just more they didn't want to deal with his intense work ethic not so much that he IS a difficult person just a SERIOUS actor who goes deeply into every detail of his character or the scene so they probably just didn't want to deal with it on a big budget production with alot of money riding on it.

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] randyhndrsn 12 years ago

Norton not being in Avengers is my greatest disappointment with that movie, him playing off of Downey just sounds like a dream come true.

reply

[–] Gustav_Fiers 12 years ago

Apart from the great possibility of having a star like Norton mixing it up with the other talent, it loses a sense of continuity, too. This is our third Hulk actor now.

reply

[–] Leveticus 12 years ago

Depends on who you want to believe:

According to Marvel, he was difficult to work with.

According to Norton, Marvel lowballed him on his contract for his next film

Of course, I'm noticing a pattern here since this is also what happened to Terrence Howard.

reply

[–] transamguy79 12 years ago

Terrence Howard was paid more then R.D. for his role in Iron Man. I can completely understand why they cut him from the squeal.

reply

[–] Darkfalz1979 12 years ago

: Terrence Howard was paid more then R.D. for his role in Iron Man

Uh, no.

: I can completely understand why they cut him from the squeal.

They cut him because he asked too much and also for equal billing. Like Marcus Chong in the Matrix sequels.

What bugs me is not that that they changed the actor, but to change him to Don Cheadle (one of the ugliest MFs in hollywood) and to also completely change the character from a friend with some sense of humour to a oh-so-serious buzzkill who can barely tolerate Stark was even worse.

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]