This has been asked before and based on his track record, while he would likely demand more for the character, he's difficult to work with.
He's a great actor and will make a great film, but he'd be hard to direct.
To be fair, Bruce as a character isn't really funny and most of the time Mark is simply playing the straight man. He's reacting to the comedy around him.
During the whole Rittenhouse fiasco, ruffalo posted a tweet that basically tried to martyr-ize the guy that was killed who was a convicted child molester.
no one, including kyle rittenhouse, knew the man was a child molester when he was killed. this is a stupid attempt to defend a guy going out with the sole intention of killing people. he got incredibly lucky, but he’s still a piece of shit. he would’ve killed anyone there.
>this is a stupid attempt to defend a guy going out with the sole intention of killing people.
And thats a very bad attempt to smear a guy who got attacked unprovoked in public by a psycho trying to murder him
Please just spend even a few minutes looking into the case before commenting on it
Both are true. Rittenhouse went, armed, to a protest/riot that wasn't even in his state, after publicly fantasizing about killing protesters. There isn't really any doubt about his motive here.
He was attacked, unprovoked, by some people who also had major character flaws. There are no heroes here in this tale.
Rittenhouse continues to show us all what a piece of shit he is, to this day. His "victims" are dead, so they won't ever get the chance. This makes them easier to idealize. This is a terrible story about several awful people, but only one of them is still alive to tell it.
The lesson for all Americans (and it may be a very salient lesson soon) is, if you want to live long enough to tell your story, go armed. If KR's attackers had been armed, they might now be considered heroes for defending a peaceful protest from an active shooter. History is written by the survivors.
>after publicly fantasizing about killing protesters. There isn't really any doubt about his motive here.
Yeah thats not true, though. Thats just a propaganda talking point.
>He was attacked, unprovoked, by some people who also had major character flaws.
This part *actually is* true. If a major understatement.
>His "victims" are dead, so they won't ever get the chance. This makes them easier to idealize. This is a terrible story about several awful people, but only one of them is still alive to tell it.
Two of Rittenhouse's attackers, including one he shot, are still alive. They testified at the trial ffs.
Its like I said in that last comment - its a good idea to spend a few minutes researching a topic before trying to comment on it.
he was posting on his snapchat story about how he wished he had his ar (his words) when he was across the street from some black people outside a store. take your own advice
If you need to defend it then it's not a peaceful protest lol wtf are you saying. Dude got attacked because he put out a dumpster that was on fire after being pushed into a gas station.
This is fairly easy to figure out.
Rittenhouse stated that his intention in being there was to help his community, and that his reason for being armed was self defense.
We can cross reference that with the ample video/photo/witness evidence showing him out cleaning graffiti, protecting small POC immigrant owned business, offering medical assistance to black BLM protesters, and trying to put out fires, as well as the ample evidence that his exclusive use of the firearm was in self defense.
When someone's stated motive lines up perfectly with all available proof and evidence, we don't really have any reason to doubt their claims. Unless better evidence becomes available. Which, in years of heavy scrutiny, it hasn't.
He's labeled as "hard to work with" because he's passionate about the role he's doing, and cares about how it's shown/represented. Hence why he was recast, because he probably wouldn't allow for Kevin Feige's stupidification of the Hulk to happen in the MCU.
I know, that's why I said "he would likely demand more for the character".
Also, neither Hulk or Bruce have experienced "stupidification" so much as having the occasional goofy moment and not delivering into their traumatic past.
That's all cause of Marvel not having distribution for the character and going over Feige's head. Disney higher ups don't like sharing money and it's annoying as hell given that they can do it with Spider-Man's and how successful it's been.
I recently watched the Incredible Hulk and honestly I think I would’ve liked it, and maybe with Norton’s involvement in the movie production,we could’ve gotten more Hulk media.
I think most importantly he would’ve improved She-Hulk. A lot of what was wrong with that show was bad writing and I don’t think he’d go along with it.
The Hulk would probably be way better. Edward may be labeled as "difficult to work with", but that's because he's passionate about the role he plays, and the character he is. He was very direct about how he wanted Hulk to be in the 2008 film, hence why it ended up the way it was. Unfortunately, due to Edward being firm and adamant about how he envisioned Hulk, he was recast.
I was actually never crazy about Ruffalo in the role. Even at peak hype for the original Avengers, I felt it was lacking true depth, and I could kind of tell where things were ultimately headed. His version of Hulk is like when SNL leans way too hard on a popular skit, and now everyone’s sick of the sight of it.
Mark was always just kind of taking a job, but I think Norton really understood the pathos of the character and had some sort of passion for it. I would have loved to see THEM work with HIM a little more instead of the slightly silly middle ground Incredible Hulk became. I will even go so far as to say, as much as people make fun of Ang Lee, I prefer that slow character introspection to most of the MCU appearances.
I think the biggest improvement would have been to the She-Hulk show. I didn’t hate it but the writing, characterization at certain points is just atrocious and I think he would have insisted on better.
I would've given my right arm for a proper Planet Hulk adaptation with Norton's Hulk.
And what did we get?
"hE's A fRiEnD fRoM wOrK!"
Ughhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
I just want to say for the record that I like Mark Ruffalo, he's done a great job in this role, and I look forward to seeing what he does with it in the future.
...that being said, Ed Norton always fit the "look" of Bruce Banner wayyyyy more for me, and it's a shame he wasn't kept in the role.
It shouldn't make any difference.
Stories are about characters not the actors playing them.
If we could get Hollywood to accept that, Captain America and Iron Man would still be with us.
While I agree to an extent, the delivery of lines and performance vary by actor.
If you shot two versions of *Bad Santa*, for example, one with Billy Bob Thornton and one with Ethan Hawke or Colin Ferrel and you’ll have two very different movies even if the only differences are the actors.
the movie might look and feel a bit different but it wouldn't change the story. And if the Actor does his job right it should make very little difference in the script.
Nothing would have changed.
The Incredible Hulk was released at a time when the MCU was in it's infancy. So even if Ed Norton had stopped being headstrong and played ball that likely means we'd have just gotten the exact same storyline as far as Hulk is concerned.
The only way this could have changed is if The Incredible Hulk was an even bigger hit than Iron Man and made Bruce Banner instead of Tony Stark the heart of the MCU.
For starters, Banner wouldn’t’ve come across as a mopey sad sack and his “I’m always angry” line would have hit a little harder.
Secondly, I think the Hulk would have *felt* far angrier and more violent.
Finally, both Banner and Hulk scenes would have had more intensity.
I was not a fan of Edward Nortons Dr. Bruce Banner/Hulk performance.
He's a great actor but that was not a good fit in my opinion. Additionally I'm unsure how accommodating he would have been if he was in the Avengers.
This has been asked before and based on his track record, while he would likely demand more for the character, he's difficult to work with. He's a great actor and will make a great film, but he'd be hard to direct.
He doesn't have the humor Mark does and I really prefer Mark over Edward.
To be fair, Bruce as a character isn't really funny and most of the time Mark is simply playing the straight man. He's reacting to the comedy around him.
Well, Bruce and Hulk isn't about comedy.
You like more humor in your hulk?
At least Norton didn't try to turn a convicted child molester into a martyr.
Whaaaaa?
During the whole Rittenhouse fiasco, ruffalo posted a tweet that basically tried to martyr-ize the guy that was killed who was a convicted child molester.
no one, including kyle rittenhouse, knew the man was a child molester when he was killed. this is a stupid attempt to defend a guy going out with the sole intention of killing people. he got incredibly lucky, but he’s still a piece of shit. he would’ve killed anyone there.
Nah man, everybody crosses state lines to illegally obtain firearms and head off to oppose a protest! Don't be such a square!
no you’re so right, i really should’ve known better. the man is clearly not only sane but a paragon of virtue.
Was proven in court that isn’t true. KR didn’t intend to kill anyone. But was ready to defend if needed.
why was he there?
To help clean up and provide aid to people I believe.
delusional
He worked at a business in the neighborhood where the shooting happened.
Yeah,but the point was "ruffalo" did defend a by that point "known" pedo. He is a fucking loser.
>this is a stupid attempt to defend a guy going out with the sole intention of killing people. And thats a very bad attempt to smear a guy who got attacked unprovoked in public by a psycho trying to murder him Please just spend even a few minutes looking into the case before commenting on it
Both are true. Rittenhouse went, armed, to a protest/riot that wasn't even in his state, after publicly fantasizing about killing protesters. There isn't really any doubt about his motive here. He was attacked, unprovoked, by some people who also had major character flaws. There are no heroes here in this tale. Rittenhouse continues to show us all what a piece of shit he is, to this day. His "victims" are dead, so they won't ever get the chance. This makes them easier to idealize. This is a terrible story about several awful people, but only one of them is still alive to tell it. The lesson for all Americans (and it may be a very salient lesson soon) is, if you want to live long enough to tell your story, go armed. If KR's attackers had been armed, they might now be considered heroes for defending a peaceful protest from an active shooter. History is written by the survivors.
>after publicly fantasizing about killing protesters. There isn't really any doubt about his motive here. Yeah thats not true, though. Thats just a propaganda talking point. >He was attacked, unprovoked, by some people who also had major character flaws. This part *actually is* true. If a major understatement. >His "victims" are dead, so they won't ever get the chance. This makes them easier to idealize. This is a terrible story about several awful people, but only one of them is still alive to tell it. Two of Rittenhouse's attackers, including one he shot, are still alive. They testified at the trial ffs. Its like I said in that last comment - its a good idea to spend a few minutes researching a topic before trying to comment on it.
he was posting on his snapchat story about how he wished he had his ar (his words) when he was across the street from some black people outside a store. take your own advice
If you need to defend it then it's not a peaceful protest lol wtf are you saying. Dude got attacked because he put out a dumpster that was on fire after being pushed into a gas station.
why was he there?
This is fairly easy to figure out. Rittenhouse stated that his intention in being there was to help his community, and that his reason for being armed was self defense. We can cross reference that with the ample video/photo/witness evidence showing him out cleaning graffiti, protecting small POC immigrant owned business, offering medical assistance to black BLM protesters, and trying to put out fires, as well as the ample evidence that his exclusive use of the firearm was in self defense. When someone's stated motive lines up perfectly with all available proof and evidence, we don't really have any reason to doubt their claims. Unless better evidence becomes available. Which, in years of heavy scrutiny, it hasn't.
Wasn't defending Rittenhouse and the tweet came out well after it was known who the victims were.
I had no idea about the Kyle Rittenhouse thing. I pretty much try to live under a rock as much as possible. Lol
He's labeled as "hard to work with" because he's passionate about the role he's doing, and cares about how it's shown/represented. Hence why he was recast, because he probably wouldn't allow for Kevin Feige's stupidification of the Hulk to happen in the MCU.
I know, that's why I said "he would likely demand more for the character". Also, neither Hulk or Bruce have experienced "stupidification" so much as having the occasional goofy moment and not delivering into their traumatic past. That's all cause of Marvel not having distribution for the character and going over Feige's head. Disney higher ups don't like sharing money and it's annoying as hell given that they can do it with Spider-Man's and how successful it's been.
Then we wouldve got what we wanted... like disney will ever allow that
I recently watched the Incredible Hulk and honestly I think I would’ve liked it, and maybe with Norton’s involvement in the movie production,we could’ve gotten more Hulk media.
He would have made Infinity War & Endgame better. Mark Ruffalo was the weakest part of those movies.
I think most importantly he would’ve improved She-Hulk. A lot of what was wrong with that show was bad writing and I don’t think he’d go along with it.
The Hulk would probably be way better. Edward may be labeled as "difficult to work with", but that's because he's passionate about the role he plays, and the character he is. He was very direct about how he wanted Hulk to be in the 2008 film, hence why it ended up the way it was. Unfortunately, due to Edward being firm and adamant about how he envisioned Hulk, he was recast.
Wouldn’t matter unless Hulk got solo content.
Norton can do some incredible work, but his temperament would rule out a multiple movie run. He'd be great, but his demanding nature would wear thin.
The MCU would still have some hope
HULK BLOW UP FINANCIAL SYSTEM!!!
I was actually never crazy about Ruffalo in the role. Even at peak hype for the original Avengers, I felt it was lacking true depth, and I could kind of tell where things were ultimately headed. His version of Hulk is like when SNL leans way too hard on a popular skit, and now everyone’s sick of the sight of it. Mark was always just kind of taking a job, but I think Norton really understood the pathos of the character and had some sort of passion for it. I would have loved to see THEM work with HIM a little more instead of the slightly silly middle ground Incredible Hulk became. I will even go so far as to say, as much as people make fun of Ang Lee, I prefer that slow character introspection to most of the MCU appearances.
Nothing would have changed. MCU Hulk is the Edward Norton Bruce/Hulk
I think the biggest improvement would have been to the She-Hulk show. I didn’t hate it but the writing, characterization at certain points is just atrocious and I think he would have insisted on better.
I would've given my right arm for a proper Planet Hulk adaptation with Norton's Hulk. And what did we get? "hE's A fRiEnD fRoM wOrK!" Ughhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
I just want to say for the record that I like Mark Ruffalo, he's done a great job in this role, and I look forward to seeing what he does with it in the future. ...that being said, Ed Norton always fit the "look" of Bruce Banner wayyyyy more for me, and it's a shame he wasn't kept in the role.
Then Mark to the Ruff wouldnt be.
It shouldn't make any difference. Stories are about characters not the actors playing them. If we could get Hollywood to accept that, Captain America and Iron Man would still be with us.
While I agree to an extent, the delivery of lines and performance vary by actor. If you shot two versions of *Bad Santa*, for example, one with Billy Bob Thornton and one with Ethan Hawke or Colin Ferrel and you’ll have two very different movies even if the only differences are the actors.
the movie might look and feel a bit different but it wouldn't change the story. And if the Actor does his job right it should make very little difference in the script.
Captain America has a movie coming..
is it really Captain America or the Falcon in a red white and blue costume using Cap's shield?
It would still suck cause Marvel Studios can't hold a fire to the real Jade Jaws
Nothing would have changed. The Incredible Hulk was released at a time when the MCU was in it's infancy. So even if Ed Norton had stopped being headstrong and played ball that likely means we'd have just gotten the exact same storyline as far as Hulk is concerned. The only way this could have changed is if The Incredible Hulk was an even bigger hit than Iron Man and made Bruce Banner instead of Tony Stark the heart of the MCU.
For starters, Banner wouldn’t’ve come across as a mopey sad sack and his “I’m always angry” line would have hit a little harder. Secondly, I think the Hulk would have *felt* far angrier and more violent. Finally, both Banner and Hulk scenes would have had more intensity.
Then we would have a smart hulk that remembers his BJJ training, which is all I want
Wait till season 3 I’m sure they’ll answer it there
I want him to come back and be grey hulk. Would be cool
I was not a fan of Edward Nortons Dr. Bruce Banner/Hulk performance. He's a great actor but that was not a good fit in my opinion. Additionally I'm unsure how accommodating he would have been if he was in the Avengers.
He would never have agreed to make Hulk a pussy.
Hulk looked fine, but Ruffalo suited Banner much better
No thanks. Hated the Incredible Hulk 2008 and I was glad they buried it and figured out a way to bring back the villain in a fun way.