Midnyte_Sun
Medianoche de Sol
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2006
- Messages
- 5,668
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 58
As long as Hulk hasn't changed his appearance, I guess it ain't half bad.
So, it WAS about the money. I can't blame either side. Norton has the right. And on Marvel's side you need to combine CGI costs as well the actors on such characters as the Hulk.
As a fan what do you want? More Banner or more Hulk?
That's easy for me, more Hulk! Same for the other alter-ego's of the Avengers!
I do admire Norton for his honesty for setting the record straight. The door could be open for him to return to Marvel or DC!
"That would be a good think, don't you think?"
As long as Hulk hasn't changed his appearance, I guess it ain't half bad.
If Mark Ruffalo is going to be Bruce Banner in the next Hulk movie, its going to officially SUCK!
It should stay the same, that Hulk didn't really have any of Norton's features.
so a recast means it will suck?
The Dark Knight and Iron Man 2 obviously flopped because of the lack of Katie Holmes and Terrance Howard, so it's a fair assumption.
They did give the Hulk a scar and a mole to match Norton's face, but it's not like anybody was paying close enough attention to see/care.