April 17, 2007

RyTunes In On Some Recent Casting Choices

Geek movies are back with a vengeance! With the advent of Spider-Man 3, sequels of your favorite (and indifferent) heroes are lacing up their boots, unwrinkling their spandex, and Ironing their Man for 2008 and beyond. A list of casting choices have been released recently, thanks to movies.aol.com. So here are my thoughts, and I welcome you to (respectfully) agree or disagree.

Edward Norton has been cast to replace Eric Bana as the Incredible Hulk for the 2008 sequel release. According to AOL Movies, in this movie the Hulk aims to find the cure for his greening. I've got three reactions to this.

1. Why, Edward, why? This is generally a move for people whose careers are faltering. It's called a desperation play, or Hail Mary. But for people like Mr. Norton, who pulls off acting with such a fine touch, this is a possible career suicide. I'm talking Roberto Benigni as Pinocchio-magnitude career suicide. This may possibly be the first truly stupid movie he's ever done.

2. I...guess he could pull it off? Edward is capable of bringing class to a lot of roles. No one else could be Smoochy. So it's possible, I suppose, that the Jekyll of the story (face it, that's all the Hulk is, Jekyll and Hyde fighting crime) could be a lot classier/more beautifully tormented.

3. He's not a hero type. Edward Norton playing truly mindless? There may be too much intelligence in him to play a bulging, raging, soup can mascot. Look how well intelligent actors did in, oh say, Wild Wild West.

Moving on.

Tom Hanks is back to further destroy Dan Brown's work in Angels And Demons. Maybe he's really a spy for art historians who despise Dan Brown, trying to sabotage the work from the inside. I don't think his portrayal is going to be any good, and I hope like Hell that the rest of the cast can make up for it.

Maggie Gyllenhal will be assuming the role of Rachel Dawes in "The Dark Knight". Question: do we still need Rachel Dawes? Really? Did we need her to begin with?

The role of Iron Man goes to...Robert Downey, Jr.! I wouldn't have been so sure about this, but his recent roles in such films as A Scanner Darkly....have not helped that in any way. It could work, but I have my reservations. Sure the guy's got an iron liver but...

...we can't forget about Speed Racer! Or can we? I don't know. I have. Anyway, Emile Hirsch will be taking the title role in May of '08. By November of '08, it will be long out of theaters, marking another victory for the intelligent portion of the American population.

So weigh in! What do you think?

2 comments:

Sophia said...

You know, I was skeptical when I heard about Edward Norton as the Hulk - I never saw the first, mostly because it sounded dreadful. But has our man Ed ever done anything truly bad? I don't think so - and if he signed on to play the Hulk, he must have had a good reason. Maybe they're going to go the way of The Dark Night, and make it darker and more complex. Also, heroes generally aren't "mindless" - and I don't think there's a hero "type". Look at Mark Hamill as Luke Skywalker, or even Michael Keaton as Batman - they don't come off as macho heroes, but they embody the idea of what a hero is, which I think Edward Norton can do.

I agree with the Tom Hanks thing. He was a pretty miserable Robert Langdon.

Maggie Gyllenhaal as Rachel Dawes - well, you always need a romantic interest. Sorry, but you do - it's just the way these stories go. I kinda wish they'd do the whole Selina Kyle/Catwoman route instead but...what can ya do? Maggie's lovely and talented, so maybe she'll actually bring something to the role? Maybe?

Doughnutman said...

I think the casting of Robert Downey Jr as Iron Man is great. Iron man is a wealthy drunk as is Downey.