The Avengers The Avengers: News and Speculation - Part 27A sub-se - Part 7

Status
Not open for further replies.
Leterrier on the audio commentary said he wanted to show Blonsky back in human form and in jail. Of course, I'd expect to still look somewhat twisted and not at all back to normal.
 
I'd rather be traditionalist on this one and say I'd prefer Blonsky to be stuck as the Abomination, just like in the comcis; it's one of the things that defines his character and distinguishes him from the Banner/Hulk duality.
 
I agree. I'd actually like to see him more evolved. With slightly more greenish skin , less transparent and more dried up, giving him a scaly look.
 
They also dropped the ball with the ears or lack of.

I think that was probably the point of their interpretation. I thought they wanted to avoid the Creature from the Black Lagoon look. That's the only reason I can think of for changing it that drastically.
 
Leterrier said there was no point having the ears as the rating forbid something like the Hulk going Tyson on them.
 
Leterrier said there was no point having the ears as the rating forbid something like the Hulk going Tyson on them.

I still don't understand that rating thing. Peter Jackson's King Kong was PG13, and Kong freaking bit off a T-Rex's tongue. And they both were distributed by Universal Pictures:huh:
 
Leterrier said there was no point having the ears as the rating forbid something like the Hulk going Tyson on them.

Perish the thought that they could have just give him the ears to make him look like he does in the comics.
 
Are you sure he wasn't joking about that?

I'm not sure but I also seem to recall someone saying that they couldnt rationalise where the fish scales and large ears would come from when he mutates as there are no fish genes in the equation. :huh::doh:

I rememeber that becuase when the comment came out a lot of folk on here were like 'WTF? It's a movie were a human being mutates into giant, monstrous being - who cares were the scales and ears have come from.........'
 
I'm not sure but I also seem to recall someone saying that they couldnt rationalise where the fish scales and large ears would come from when he mutates as there are no fish genes in the equation. :huh::doh:

I rememeber that becuase when the comment came out a lot of folk on here were like 'WTF? It's a movie were a human being mutates into giant, monstrous being - who cares were the scales and ears have come from.........'

Heres an interview where Leterrier discussed it.

http://www.mania.com/louis-leterrier-incredible-hulk-controversies_article_91075.html
 
I'm not sure but I also seem to recall someone saying that they couldnt rationalise where the fish scales and large ears would come from when he mutates as there are no fish genes in the equation. :huh::doh:

I rememeber that becuase when the comment came out a lot of folk on here were like 'WTF? It's a movie were a human being mutates into giant, monstrous being - who cares were the scales and ears have come from.........'

I largely agree. I wish they'd have hewn a little closer to comic book Abomb but oh well.
 
I'm not sure but I also seem to recall someone saying that they couldnt rationalise where the fish scales and large ears would come from when he mutates as there are no fish genes in the equation. :huh::doh:

I rememeber that becuase when the comment came out a lot of folk on here were like 'WTF? It's a movie were a human being mutates into giant, monstrous being - who cares were the scales and ears have come from.........'

I agree, they could have found an adaption closer to the comics but still looked cool.

From reading the interview linked by marvel_freshman I just don't think the director's rationale rings true. It feels like he's saying he would be compelled to make the Hulk rip off those ears if he had to include them. Which to me suggests more that he didn't really want to rather than it being a real reason to keeping the original features of Abomination.
 
Last edited:
I'd rather be traditionalist on this one and say I'd prefer Blonsky to be stuck as the Abomination, just like in the comcis; it's one of the things that defines his character and distinguishes him from the Banner/Hulk duality.

I agree, however, I really enjoyed Tim Roth's Blonsky and would love to see him again, not just Abomination.
 
I liked the Abomination in the movie. I thought it was an improvement "look" wise. I hope they keep it similar if he shows up again.
 
I agree, however, I really enjoyed Tim Roth's Blonsky and would love to see him again, not just Abomination.

I really liked him as well. One of the better villains.
 
Roth as Abomination is probably in my top five favorite villains in a Comic Book film. He was great. I honestly think TIH might be my favorite MCU film. I don't know. When Cap comes out on Blu-ray I'm going to watch all of them in one week and try to rank them all legitimately.
 
Downey was waiting in the back for Favreau to call him onstage; he returns to New Mexico tomorrow to set of The Avengers. "When you have nothing to lose you take risks, make it trippy," said Downey.
 
Lol, important Avengers news from RDJ: Kevin Feige has a brand new Jaguar, which has been scratched and is in the shop.
 
RDJ on The Avengers - "I hate everybody... Not the cast or Joss. Whedon is nailing it!"
 
RDJ: "I tend to look at scene, refusing to do it, because how could you put all these clowns together, six weeks in. It's going to be great!"
 
Favreau admitted, that they (he & RDJ) didn't get to do what they wanted because "now we had something to protect," for marvel + studio, there was the hulk ending, etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"