Since last post: 1759 days Last activity: 1699 days
#1 Posted on 8.7.03 0339.19 Reposted on: 8.7.10 0339.54
"Hollywood star Brad Pitt has reportedly signed to star as Captain America in a new movie about the comic book hero. Tinseltown bosses want the film to emulate the success of recent comic adaptations Spider-Man and The Hulk. According to reports, Pitt - who is currently filming historical epic Troy - is due to begin shooting Captain American next year. He says, "I wanted to make an all-out family movie - something that all ages can go to. And as a child it was my favorite comic." Meanwhile, the studio grapevine also claims Pitt is keen to reprise his role as an Irish gypsy in a follow-up to Guy Ritchie's 2000 gangster movie Snatch."
Another super hero movie. I was never a big Captain America fan so I don't know if this is good casting or not. Does anyone else know?
Since last post: 3646 days Last activity: 3589 days
#3 Posted on 8.7.03 0411.25 Reposted on: 8.7.10 0412.25
Harry at AICN has been talking to his close personal friend, Avi Arid (Not that Harry likes to name-drop, naturally), and there are no plans at the moment for a Capt. America film and there has been no discussions over casting.
Since last post: 1785 days Last activity: 1517 days
#6 Posted on 9.7.03 0011.42 Reposted on: 9.7.10 0011.43
I don't think there's much weight to these Brad Pitt/Captain America rumors. Plus Pitt will be 40 years old before the year's up, and Cap was around 22-23 at the time of his being frozen in WW2. I'd much rather see some inspired casting for captain america rather than just going with some marquee name superstar like what was done with Ben Affleck in Daredevil...which sucked.
Anyway, last I heard, Artisan has the movie rights to captain america, do they have enough money to fund a probably 100-150 million dollar plus project? I know there've been rumors of Marvel buying artisan. If that happens maybe marvel can license the captain america film rights to another company that can give it some more dough that artisan doesn't have.
Since last post: 3035 days Last activity: 3035 days
#9 Posted on 13.7.03 2052.57 Reposted on: 13.7.10 2053.12
Using a marquee name as a superhero doesn't really work too often, IMO because it's hard to get lost in the film. Watching Daredevil, I felt like I was watching Ben Affleck playing dress-up or something. I have no idea if that makes sense at all.
#10 Posted on 14.7.03 0804.37 Reposted on: 14.7.10 0805.38
Originally posted by fuelinjectedUsing a marquee name as a superhero doesn't really work too often, IMO because it's hard to get lost in the film. Watching Daredevil, I felt like I was watching Ben Affleck playing dress-up or something. I have no idea if that makes sense at all.
Sure it does. On the Superman DVD, director Richard Donner said they wanted to go with an unknown in the title role (the then-not-on-the-Hollywood-radar Christopher Reeve), because if they got a big star like Robert Redford like the Salkinds (producers) or Warner Bros. had hinted, then you would've had a hard time believing the movie. Superman gear or no, you know Redford can't really fly; hence, you don't buy the whole flick. Suspension of disbelief goes out the window.
On the other hand, I did buy Gene Hackman as Lex Luthor and Marlon Brando as Jor-El, and didn't sit there thinking "hey, Gene Hackman's got Kryptonite" or "why doesn't the Kryptonian Council believe Brando? Where's his bike, anyway?"
I know I've posted this here before, but damn if I can find it. So there ya go...makes perfect sense.
ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE