The Natalie Portman/Jane Foster Thread

[sgaana]

Corp -- yeah, in the Ultimates universe, Donald Blake shows up in the recent Thor mini-series as a psychiatrist brought in to try to determine whether Thor (when he first starts the program with Dr. Braddock) is nuts or not; after Thor starts in on the whole, "yeah, I'm *actually* Thor" thing, I mean. It's revealed through the mini that just as Thor was... I don't know, reborn on Earth or manifested on Earth as a mortal who didn't know he was Thor until reaching adulthood, the same thing happened to Balder, who became Don Blake.

Which in the Ultimates verse makes sense, I guess, as they had long ago established that Thor's mortal identity wasn't Don Blake.

Not to say the MCU will necessarily follow this. They seem to pick and choose what they want to incorporate from both 616 and Ultimates. Just that, since they have already established that MCU Don Blake exists separately from MCU Thor, they could do something along similar lines.

Originally Posted by Jinouga

Plus how would Loki react to finding out that Thor has a legitimate younger brother and that he'll be even more unimportant to Odin in the scheme of things what with him being just the offspring of a Frost Giant king whom Odin adopted. Talk about feeling even more insignificant than he already does. Really, it makes you side more with Loki considering all that Odin should have done and should have told him about his lineage. I'm betting that Odin never complimented Loki on his mastery of magic, instead focusing on Thor's physical abilities when what Odin should have done was praise Loki and try to get him to use his magic for good. But I'm just letting my imagination get carried away again!

Oh, I agree. You know, for a guy who gave up one of his eyes in order to gain knowledge and wisdom, you'd think Odin would have been smarter about that whole thing. I don't think there was anything wrong with his idea of, "raise this Jotun baby and make him a friend of the Aesir, so that sometime later, we can help install him as a friendly King of the Jotuns". It was the "then not telling Loki about it until his hand was forced" thing. That doesn't even make sense. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that that was more likely to make Loki resentful than a good ally king. As you say, for that plan to work, he should have told Loki in late childhood and then praised him for developing along lines that would make him a good Jotun king.

I almost feel bad for Odin, because it more strongly seems like Hand of the Author stuff. That is, that he didn't do the smart thing because the overall story depended on it, not because it made sense or was in character for him to act that way. If he hadn't been stupid about it, we wouldn't have a story.

[TheCorpulent1]

Ugh, I'm really hoping they don't follow that in the movies. It's sad that the height of 'creativity' in the Ultimate line is just swapping characters' identities.

[04nbod]

Originally Posted by Jinouga

I guess the gist of what I'm trying to say is that the Hero shouldn't always get the girl, and of course Thor would handle it in as decent and mature a way as possible.

That's already been done with Rachel Dawes though. We need to want them to succeed and if they are seperated pity them. I don't think we pity anyone if one of the characters randomly hooks up with someone else and even worse if Thor then just accepts it and starts on one of his friends.

I've always thought the best way to show Thor's growing humility is through his rejection of the idea Gods and Mortals have a heirarchical relationship. For Thor to say that this amazing but average girl is just as good as any goddess is showing his maturity. The tension never comes from a stupid love triangle, it comes from Odin and their differences. That is what makes it pretty unique in Superhero romances. By having Odin as this outside force trying to tear them apart we want them to stay together. To use Sif there would damage her character.Do we really want to go Team Jane vs Team Sif?

All of this should be left for the third though. The second has to be about Thor and Jane setting up a growing relationship on solid footing. We know they are interested in each other but we have to get to the point where they never want to be apart.

[herolee10]

Imho, regardless if whether he ultimately ends up with Jane or not, what's important right now is that they conclude the cliffhanger set between Thor and Jane at the end of "Thor".

[mclay18]

Originally Posted by Jinouga

I don't think that she's consider being in another Thor movie as beneath her status despite winning an Oscar either.

Yeah. I didn't hear a lot of people questioning whether Gwyneth Paltrow would return as Pepper in Iron Man 2 around May 2008 -- and like Portman, she too is an Oscar-winner and mother. I'm sure they can schedule Portman's scenes around her family if she requests.

As long as Portman likes the script and gets along with the director and producers, I don't think her return is a non-issue. I don't want to jinx it, but I pray she returns. She and Hemsworth were the best thing about Thor, and there'd be a hole in my heart if she was recast or written out for the sequel.

[herolee10]

Originally Posted by mclay18

Yeah. I didn't hear a lot of people questioning whether Gwyneth Paltrow would return as Pepper in Iron Man 2 around May 2008 -- and like Portman, she too is an Oscar-winner and mother. I'm sure they can schedule Portman's scenes around her family if she requests.

As long as Portman likes the script and gets along with the director and producers, I don't think her return is a non-issue. I don't want to jinx it, but I pray she returns. She and Hemsworth were the best thing about Thor, and there'd be a hole in my heart if she was recast or written out for the sequel.

Well, like others have said, Natalie has a contract for future films, so unless her contract states that she has the choice to NOT return, then I think we're good on that department.

I mean, unlike the Norton and Terrence Howard situation, it's not like Portman was getting paid the most in the film, and there wasn't any report of her being difficult to work with or wanting creative control..so I think we're good.

Plus, she seems to have hit it off in regards to friendship with Hemmsworth, so that's another plus factor.

And really, if she's interested in doing films like "Your Highness" or "No strings attached", then I think Thor 2 wouldn't be considered "beneath" her.haha

[04nbod]

Originally Posted by herolee10

Imho, regardless if whether he ultimately ends up with Jane or not, what's important right now is that they conclude the cliffhanger set between Thor and Jane at the end of "Thor".

I think it has to be thought about because the storyline potentially involves 4 of the characters and could be very damaging if done wrong.

The cliffhanger just needs Jane to return. I think the lack of Jane in The Avengers undermines the cliffhanger the most. What is the point in her search if someone else finds him? What is the point of him wanting to get back if he returns to Asgard immediately when he does return?

Its hard to see what Marvel are up to and I think their poor history with the character in the comics has only added to the sense of worry. How is she going to get screwed over this time?

[herolee10]

Originally Posted by 04nbod

I think it has to be thought about because the storyline potentially involves 4 of the characters and could be very damaging if done wrong.

The cliffhanger just needs Jane to return. I think the lack of Jane in The Avengers undermines the cliffhanger the most. What is the point in her search if someone else finds him? What is the point of him wanting to get back if he returns to Asgard immediately when he does return?

Its hard to see what Marvel are up to and I think their poor history with the character in the comics has only added to the sense of worry. How is she going to get screwed over this time?

Well she MAY still be in the film..I mean, she may just have a cameo which could be filmed later on in the year during reshoots.

[TheCorpulent1]

Yeah, Sam Jackson claimed he wasn't in Thor at all, but he turned up in the after-credits scene.

[mclay18]

Originally Posted by TheCorpulent1

Yeah, Sam Jackson claimed he wasn't in Thor at all, but he turned up in the after-credits scene.

Plus, Natalie's had her kid and slimmed back down. I won't be surprised if they shoot something with her in January or something.

[cherokeesam]

http://www.superherohype.com/news/ar...tails-revealed

"[We're going to] take Thor literally to other worlds," Feige told EW, "...[It will] primarily be the journey of that character, of he and Jane Foster and how the new dynamic with his father is working out, as well as what are the broader stakes for The Nine Worlds.”

Pretty much confirms Jane Foster is returning.

[TheCorpulent1]

Doesn't necessarily mean that Natalie Portman's reprising the role, though.

[Liam_H]

It be real annoying if they recast.

[TheCorpulent1]

Eh, I wouldn't mind. Hemsworth and Hiddleston are the only ones I really, absolutely need to see come back. I'd prefer all the original actors, but I think Hemsworth and Hiddleston are the only two who'd really make or break the movie for me.

[Liam_H]

Well of course but I just appreciate continuity...

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

[herolee10]

I think Portman will reprise since she's contracted for several films, and her name and attachment to the role would only help sales and it's not like she's demanding the most money from the film or demanding creative controls over her character.

[Sith Scotti]

Yes but they should do all in their power to keep Portman ... This isn't the Katie Hiolmes situation where your likely to find an upgrade .

[InvisibleWoman]

It would be unfortunate if they recast the role... 1. Continuity and 2. I thought Natalie and Chris had great chemistry and it would be a shame not to see them explore that further.

Anyway, I have a feeling that doing Thor 2 may be the perfect way for Natalie to ease her way back into movie making post-baby. It's not the leading role so would probably allow her flexibility schedule-wise and she said that doing NSA and Thor was good for her after the intensity of Black Swan so... I have a feeling that reprising Jane might be appeling to her! *fingers crossed*

[Liam_H]

Portman is not the type of actress to turn down something now that she's won the Oscar. The girl enjoys doing something fun which is what I love about her.

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by InvisibleWoman

It would be unfortunate if they recast the role... 1. Continuity and 2. I thought Natalie and Chris had great chemistry and it would be a shame not to see them explore that further.

Anyway, I have a feeling that doing Thor 2 may be the perfect way for Natalie to ease her way back into movie making post-baby. It's not the leading role so would probably allow her flexibility schedule-wise and she said that doing NSA and Thor was good for her after the intensity of Black Swan so... I have a feeling that reprising Jane might be appeling to her! *fingers crossed*

As long as it's not particularly physically demanding. It's possible that Feige's recent sketchy comments about Thor 2's story point towards a "Thor 'n' Jane jaunt across the Nine Realms" thing, which could call for a lot of physicality on Jane's part.

Then again, a lot of actresses these days *like* to be physically challenged in roles immediately after having a baby, so who knoweth.

[mclay18]

Phew. Marvel confirmed Natalie will be back for Thor 2.

http://www.deadline.com/2011/10/told...or-2-director/

Interesting that Tom Hiddleston will return as well.

[herolee10]

Originally Posted by mclay18

Phew. Marvel confirmed Natalie will be back for Thor 2.

http://www.deadline.com/2011/10/told...or-2-director/

Interesting that Tom Hiddleston will return as well.

Indeed and now we can go back to wondering (well some of us at least.lol) if she'll cameo in the Avengers.lol

[Rac]

Originally Posted by Liam_H

Portman is not the type of actress to turn down something now that she's won the Oscar. The girl enjoys doing something fun which is what I love about her.

She hasn't done anything since she won the Oscar. (Because pregnancy.)

[Liam_H]

Yea I knew that already.

[mclay18]

Originally Posted by Rac

She hasn't done anything since she won the Oscar. (Because pregnancy.)

Not just the pregnancy thing, she wanted a break in general. She's in a prime place in her career where she's comfortable and able to take time off for herself and her family.