Xixax Film Forum

Film Discussion => In Front of the Camera => Topic started by: AlguienEstolamiPantalones on March 31, 2003, 07:45:00 PM

Title: Ed norton
Post by: AlguienEstolamiPantalones on March 31, 2003, 07:45:00 PM
ok ya know what here goes, i just dont get it

to me ed norton is a ok actor he does his job well, but i never seen a performance of his that has really knocked me out

but why do people give him so much praise , thats why i am posting

maybe i am missing something, but i just do not see it.

when he made that movie with brando and deniro people were going on and on about how this is three generations of actors who define their eras.

i want to see arguements on both sides here because like I said i do not look to him as someone whos work i really enjoy, like for example i saw 25th hour not because of him but because the film looked interesting .
Title: Re: Ed norton
Post by: Cecil on March 31, 2003, 08:16:44 PM
Quote from: Butterscotch Jones
to me ed norton is a ok actor he does his job well, but i never seen a performance of his that has really knocked me out

but why do people give him so much praise , thats why i am posting

probable because of american history x and fight club. he was really great in those

he was also good in primal fear and rounders.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: AlguienEstolamiPantalones on March 31, 2003, 08:25:38 PM
fight club was good but not because of any break through acting on ed nortons part. I can not think of one scene where his acting blew me away

he was good in american history X maybe his best role , but still not enough to ya know make me care about his career.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: BonBon85 on March 31, 2003, 09:09:40 PM
The first Norton movie I saw was American History X and that definitely made for a good first impression. He had the perfect deadpan voice for Fight Club. He's pretty good, but has made some bad decisions (i.e. making Keeping the Faith)

And he's dead sexy
Title: Ed norton
Post by: AlguienEstolamiPantalones on March 31, 2003, 11:12:36 PM
Quote from: BonBon85The first Norton movie I saw was American History X and that definitely made for a good first impression. He had the perfect deadpan voice for Fight Club. He's pretty good, but has made some bad decisions (i.e. making Keeping the Faith)

And he's dead sexy

yeah i think he is pretty good too, but not one of the best actors out right now. thats why i created this post, so people can explain why a pretty good actor gets massive props .
Title: Ed norton
Post by: cowboykurtis on March 31, 2003, 11:20:55 PM
i always love hearing people rag on others in the industry. you are not in his position. if he takes a bad film you dont know the politics behind it. the script for a film could change drastically from script to screen or he could be under contract with a studio and be forced into making a film he doesnt believe in. if edward nroton is not a good modern actor than who is in your opinion?  im curious becuase you seem to be over critical about everything without backing it up with anything valid -- an opinion is fine, but back it up with something other than saying he sucks -- why does he suck?
Title: Ed norton
Post by: Cecil on March 31, 2003, 11:21:54 PM
i think he deserves to be called a great actor on the merits of american history x alone. lately, he just hasnt been picking the "right" roles, thats all
Title: Ed norton
Post by: AlguienEstolamiPantalones on March 31, 2003, 11:27:23 PM
yo larry fishburn , where did i say he sucks ????

all i said is i would like it if someone can show me something that i may be missing . Like a essay about why they think he is one of the best actors out there. Im sorry i need more then just a short " yeah he is cool"

i write posts where i express why i feel a certain way, is it to much to ask the same.

and no cecil that one film alone was not enough to judge a whole body of work.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: cowboykurtis on March 31, 2003, 11:31:02 PM
i love you butterscotch
Title: Ed norton
Post by: AlguienEstolamiPantalones on March 31, 2003, 11:33:16 PM
Quote from: cowboykurtisi love you butterscotch

duhhh !! who wouldnt
Title: Ed norton
Post by: AlguienEstolamiPantalones on March 31, 2003, 11:57:10 PM
Quote from: Film StudentHe's no Kevin Costner, but I think with a little more experience and a few better career choices, he'll grow to be a pretty good actor.

He also needs to get on board with some better directors.

i dont think this is what i was lookin for . :(

i guess i got my answer, none of us really know why he gets the props he gets , but at least some of us are honest about it
Title: Ed norton
Post by: atticus jones on April 01, 2003, 12:25:27 AM
top ten reasons why edno gets props:

10) he went to yale
9) he's not ben affleck
8) he landed primal fear
7) he's not ashton kutcher
6) he shredded am his x
5) he's not frankie munoz
4) he scorched fight club
3) he's not paul walker
2) he sleeps with selma hayek
1) he's not buttersnatch jones
Title: Ed norton
Post by: Duck Sauce on April 01, 2003, 12:28:42 AM
I think people say he is such a great actor because he has been in a lot of great (or well liked) movies. I like Ed Norton, he seems like a nice gentle guy and fits roles fairly well. Aside from the other mentioned he was really good in 25th Hour. Just stay the fuck away from Devito
Title: Ed norton
Post by: AlguienEstolamiPantalones on April 01, 2003, 12:29:26 AM
Quote from: miss jonestop ten reasons why edno gets props:

10) he went to yale
9) he's not ben affleck
8) he landed primal fear
7) he's not ashton kutcher
6) he shredded am his x
5) he's not frankie munoz
4) he scorched fight club
3) he's not paul walker
2) he sleeps with selma hayek
1) he's not buttersnatch jones

Ohhh burn

yeah me fast and the furious guy and malcom in the middle, be sure that none of us will be getting a good nights sleep tonight , now that you zinged us so
Title: Ed norton
Post by: AlguienEstolamiPantalones on April 01, 2003, 12:32:31 AM
Quote from: Duck SauceI think people say he is such a great actor because he has been in a lot of great (or well liked) movies. I like Ed Norton, he seems like a nice gentle guy and fits roles fairly well. Aside from the other mentioned he was really good in 25th Hour. Just stay the fuck away from Devito

he gets offered really good shit like 25th hour because of this whole best actor of his era rep. That was a great part, with or with out him, and he didnt do anything to take the words from the script and send them in the cosmos . Again i say that he is a good actor, but not even close to being near the best
Title: Ed norton
Post by: ©brad on April 01, 2003, 02:45:50 AM
WHO CARES?
Title: Ed norton
Post by: Tommy Both on April 01, 2003, 02:54:11 AM
Quote from: miss jonestop ten reasons why

edno gets props:
2) he sleeps with selma hayek

:evil:
Title: Ed norton
Post by: budgie on April 01, 2003, 05:59:42 AM
How exactly do you define 'great acting', though? You can't do it without relating the performance to the rest of the movie and all the associations brought to bear on it. I'd talk about Norton's charisma, and the way he makes you look at him rather than anything/one else on the screen, a subjective response. I think he is outstandingly interesting to watch, which is partly to do with the way he just is, and partly to do with the range he has in using his voice and body:see Primal Fear for him doing it within one movie but look across his career to see him adapting to fit particular roles and films. He isn't flashy and he doesn't disrupt the overall aim, so he doesn't grab attention in an Oscar-winning kind of way, but that's part of his greatness. He works with the movie but at the same time he is the star.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: Duck Sauce on April 01, 2003, 10:15:53 AM
Are you arguing that he is not a great actor just bcause you dont like him or what is the deal? I mean your arguments can be applied to anybody who has been called a great actor. Lets not over analyze a stupid label. I like Norton.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: MacGuffin on April 01, 2003, 10:19:24 AM
thought he was miscast in red dragon though, fo real.  :yabbse-wink:
Title: Ed norton
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 01, 2003, 11:28:22 AM
I think Norton is trying too hard to go roles that really don't relate to him that well. I've never seen The 25th Hour, but I assume his role is near what I am going to talk about. I think he is really trying as hard as he can to go for roles that are of intimidating characters, like The Red Dragon in playing a super star cop and The Score, when he is the criminal standing up to De Niro in a tough way. The thing is, I really don't buy it that much. I was only convinced by him doing this kind of role in American History X. The others his body appearance gives him away too much. The scrawniness of his body and middle america look, as much as he wants to distance himself from it, really still shows a lot in those movies. He feels like the kid who wanted to be of intimidation and acted out all the parts fitting that in front of his mirror, but could never really get past that kind of acting. The most convincing part he has played in my mind fitting to what his impression alone gives was of the cautious and nerdy boyfriend in Woody Allen's "Everyone Says I Love You".

~rougerum
Title: Ed norton
Post by: budgie on April 01, 2003, 12:18:18 PM
Quote from: Duck SauceAre you arguing that he is not a great actor just bcause you dont like him or what is the deal? I mean your arguments can be applied to anybody who has been called a great actor. Lets not over analyze a stupid label. I like Norton.

In trying to answer the question of whether and why he might be called 'a great actor' don't you have to first ask what you mean by 'a great actor' in order to be able to make a judgment? I was suggesting that, to me at least, Norton's (and other's it seems) great acting is about his ability in transforming the way the audience reads the off-screen idea of 'Ed Norton', while at the same time being right for the movie. It's personal, though, whether we find him great at doing that or not. I find him convincing, despite his body type but GT doesn't (though I get what you mean, GT), and more subtle than many others. You just saying 'I like Norton' means shit, but if that's cause you're scared of offering any other kind of analysis cause someone might disagree with you then I guess that's ok.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: Duck Sauce on April 01, 2003, 01:36:21 PM
Quote from: budgie
You just saying 'I like Norton' means shit, but if that's cause you're scared of offering any other kind of analysis cause someone might disagree with you then I guess that's ok.

Your right, I dont want any place in this argument, I dont really have an opinion on Norton other than I have liked him in a lot of movies. Im just saying that we arent going to get anywhere because everybodys opinion is different and everybodys view of a great actor is different.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: EL__SCORCHO on April 01, 2003, 07:42:47 PM
i hear he likes to rewrite scripts, and I'm not talking about frida. I don't know, he just seems like a stuck up asshole and I cant get that out of my head when i see him act.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: AlguienEstolamiPantalones on April 01, 2003, 09:03:32 PM
all i wanted was examples of greatness, and no one was able to come out without anything that didnt sound like a bad cliche.

i almost waited to hear someone say " this is a question with out a answer like what is the meaning of life"

fuck off

all i wanted was something like this

tom cruise in that scene in magnolia when he gets his whole life exposed as a lie , the look on his face, his responce , that was greatness

after that he could never just be looked at as some douche who makes cheesy action movies .

notice how i didnt say he was good in rainman so that is enough to call him a great actor , that wasnt my point.

what i was looking for was examples of scenes that showoff ones gift of greatness . Like with de niro i could rattle off a laundry list of shit

whatever i got my answer
Title: Ed norton
Post by: Cecil on April 01, 2003, 09:06:41 PM
i dont understand..... american history x had tons of moments of "greatness".... you know when theyre all sitting at the table and his mothers boyfriend is talking about the persecution of the jews, the way hes looking at him from across the table... that isnt "greatness" to you?
Title: Ed norton
Post by: AlguienEstolamiPantalones on April 01, 2003, 09:12:05 PM
that may of been the first real example of someone defending his work cecil, thats all i asked for was examples

but i still think that was a ok scene still not what i would call greatness

but i did say yesterday that american history x was his best performance, but i still think its a stretch to call him the ebst actor of his generation.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: AlguienEstolamiPantalones on April 01, 2003, 09:28:53 PM
in responce to budgie

what you are saying is that he is a good actor, thats what i said but i do not think he is " greatness"

greatness, is becomeing your part each and every time, being able to play a cute dad one minute then a blood thirsty bastard the next

every time i see ed norton in a movie, i see ed norton, kinda almost one noteish He looks and acts the same in almost every part

the same cant be said of sam jackson, sam jackson can fucking be mace windu and he can be desperate dad in changing lanes

sam jackson will go down in history as one of the best actors to ever live, and why ? because he earned it.

ok here is another example of greatness sandler on the phone with his sister in pdl, the scene when he was trying to get emily watsons info and she wouldnt give it to him.

pta wrote a great scene, but sandler is the one who took it and made it into something beyond beautiful .

so yeah ed norton is good, but its high time we stop calling him one of the best actor of our times .
Title: Ed norton
Post by: Sleuth on April 01, 2003, 09:35:30 PM
This thread is a revelation!
Title: Ed norton
Post by: bonanzataz on April 01, 2003, 09:36:56 PM
I've always thought this. I'd always liked norton, and then all these magazines came out and said "he's the actor of our generation." I was just like, what? where the hell did that notion come from?
Title: Ed norton
Post by: AlguienEstolamiPantalones on April 01, 2003, 09:41:42 PM
Quote from: picolasI've always thought this. I'd always liked norton, and then all these magazines came out and said "he's the actor of our generation." I was just like, what? where the hell did that notion come from?

THANK YOU !!!!!!!!!!!!! THATS ALL I WAS TRYING TO SAY
Title: Ed norton
Post by: Sleuth on April 01, 2003, 09:43:47 PM
Who would you say is the real owner of that title
Title: Ed norton
Post by: AlguienEstolamiPantalones on April 01, 2003, 09:55:58 PM
well i guess we would have to go into the 90's since that was his era more or less.

i think that sam jackson was the best actor of the 90's, ok he and ed norton are years apart, I am talking about the era.

John Turturro, can play the fuck out of all sorts of things and be world apart each time .

i think gary oldman like i said in a earlier post, is around the top of my list, i just think he needs to pick better films.

he needs that one film, i would love to see him in something like monsters ball . Or a far from heaven type role, rather then his part in hannibal
Title: Ed norton
Post by: budgie on April 02, 2003, 03:41:13 AM
Quote from: Butterscotch Jones

what you are saying is that he is a good actor, thats what i said but i do not think he is " greatness"

What I am saying is that greatness is a matter of opinion. I think he's great.


Quotegreatness, is becomeing your part each and every time, being able to play a cute dad one minute then a blood thirsty bastard the next

Cute = Keeping the Faith   Blood thirsty = Am History X?

Or, as I said, Primal Fear for both in one movie. Or Fight Club for both in one movie. Or 25th Hour for suggesting immorality and appeal in one character.



Quoteevery time i see ed norton in a movie, i see ed norton, kinda almost one noteish He looks and acts the same in almost every part

Then that's what you see.


Quotethe same cant be said of sam jackson, sam jackson can fucking be mace windu and he can be desperate dad in changing lanes

Whatever

Quotesam jackson will go down in history as one of the best actors to ever live, and why ? because he earned it.

When is the Butterscotch Jones History of the Cinema coming out?

Quoteok here is another example of greatness sandler on the phone with his sister in pdl, the scene when he was trying to get emily watsons info and she wouldnt give it to him.

pta wrote a great scene, but sandler is the one who took it and made it into something beyond beautiful .

Wrote and directed.

Quoteso yeah ed norton is good, but its high time we stop calling him one of the best actor of our times .

You are wrong.

Gee, haven't had this much fun since yesterday
Title: Ed norton
Post by: AlguienEstolamiPantalones on April 02, 2003, 03:47:25 AM
you posted nothing to prove that i am wrong, just short pointless soundbites.

Never once going into detail as to why you feel what you feel .

but do not waste your time, i let this boat sail , and i do not really expect much from you on this, well based on your past few posts on this matter
Title: Ed norton
Post by: budgie on April 02, 2003, 04:07:06 AM
:yabbse-cry:
Title: Ed norton
Post by: AlguienEstolamiPantalones on April 02, 2003, 04:18:04 AM
well what do you expect.

you were dead wrong about everything, keeping the faith he was great in that ??? that was a fucking sitcom, it could of been paul reiser playing that part who would notice

and bloodthirsty in amer his x ????????????????? what , no i would say the character was misguided and brash , but bloodthirsthy ?????


no sometimes greatness is not just one persons opinion, for some its just a fact . you said you think he is great and then did nothing to prove why you think he is great, speak on it, show some passion if you have some

When is the Butterscotch Jones History of the Cinema coming out, your reading it baby .

call me a nut, but i think i need more then bullshit cliches like " he's cool" to sway me, i think you had a few good points about Garry oldman like his disdain and self destructive streak, but on ed norton your way off.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: Cecil on April 02, 2003, 10:47:31 AM
i reeeeeeeeally dont understand this.... if you dont think hes a great actor, then you dont think hes a great actor. how can someome "convince" you that hes great?... youve seen the same films we have.... its just a matter of opinion.

the "3 actors who define their generation" thing is just marketing. who cares. yes it probably is an exaggerated comment. but if it is, i havent heard anyone else mention a better actor that deserves the title.... no its not the best actor of the 90s, sam jackson is too old. it needs to be someone in late 20s, early 30s
Title: Ed norton
Post by: RegularKarate on April 02, 2003, 02:16:31 PM
I don't see how you could sit here flaming Ed Norton for being overrated when you're comparing him to Samuel Jackson... a good actor at best.

The main reason people like Sam Jackson is because he's "cool".  He doesn't have that much range, it's just varied degrees of emotion and attitude.

I'm not saying Norton IS the best actor of our generation, that's just like Cec said, shit the magazines make up.  I'm just wondering why you are saying Jackson is better when he's just someone people like because of a few of the characters he's played.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: Sleuth on April 02, 2003, 02:26:08 PM
Is it true that for every Keeping the Faith, there's a Formula 51?
Title: Ed norton
Post by: AlguienEstolamiPantalones on April 02, 2003, 07:46:49 PM
Quote from: RegularKarateI don't see how you could sit here flaming Ed Norton for being overrated when you're comparing him to Samuel Jackson... a good actor at best.

The main reason people like Sam Jackson is because he's "cool".  He doesn't have that much range, it's just varied degrees of emotion and attitude.

I'm not saying Norton IS the best actor of our generation, that's just like Cec said, shit the magazines make up.  I'm just wondering why you are saying Jackson is better when he's just someone people like because of a few of the characters he's played.

what the fuck sam jackson has no range , its not like i ever respected your opinion but now all forget it. i will write a huge sam jackson peice later but for now your insane
Title: Ed norton
Post by: soixante on April 02, 2003, 08:36:31 PM
Edward Norton is very versatile.  Compare the murder suspect he played in Primal Fear to the lawyer in People vs. Larry Flynt.  Totally different characters, and he nailed the nuances of both.

In American History X, he shows a great deal of range -- we see him as an angry white supremacist and we see him as a reformed, sadder but wiser ex-con trying to put his life back together.  We even see a flashback of him when he was a teenager, having dinner with his father, and we see the innocence that was lost soon thereafter.

He's able to master accents (Primal Fear), act like a mentally disabled person (The Score), play a Johnny Boy-type scuzzball (Rounders), play an Ivy League educated attorney (People vs. Larry Flynt), a bored yuppie (Fight Club).

Going back to American History X, his line deliveries convey disdain, concern, repentance, hatred, wisdom, anger, a whole gamut of emotions.  His facial expressions convey a wide palette of emotions.  Most of all, I get the feeling that there is an internal life going on in the characters Norton plays.  Even if he doesn't deliver a line, you can see the internal life in his eyes.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: bonanzataz on April 02, 2003, 09:25:59 PM
i just saw part of death to smoochy. it wasn't the best movie i've ever seen but i got a COUPLE of chuckles out of it. why does it get such a bad rep? because it did poorly at the box office? anyway, norton cracked me up.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: Sleuth on April 02, 2003, 09:43:11 PM
I thought Death to Smoochy was swell.  I don't know why it gets a bad rap
Title: Ed norton
Post by: RegularKarate on April 02, 2003, 11:10:27 PM
Quote from: Butterscotch Joneswhat the fuck sam jackson has no range , its not like i ever respected your opinion but now all forget it. i will write a huge sam jackson peice later but for now your insane

I didn't say he had NO range, just very little.

Seriously... I like Sam Jackson, I think there are roles he takes that no one else could fill... he's just not as good as some people build him up to be.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: budgie on April 03, 2003, 05:25:58 AM
Quote from: Butterscotch Joneswell what do you expect.

Quote from: polkablues
Quote from: budgieWhat's more fun, playing with font sizes or being sarcastic?

The two go together like vodka and handguns.  Inseparable.

I forgot smilies!

Quoteno sometimes greatness is not just one persons opinion, for some its just a fact . you said you think he is great and then did nothing to prove why you think he is great, speak on it, show some passion if you have some

No, greatness is never a fact. And I don't have to 'prove' anything, least of all my passion. Baby.

QuoteWhen is the Butterscotch Jones History of the Cinema coming out, your reading it baby .

Who is your proofreader?
Title: Ed norton
Post by: polkablues on April 03, 2003, 02:51:29 PM
Quote from: RegularKarateI didn't say he had NO range, just very little.

Seriously... I like Sam Jackson, I think there are roles he takes that no one else could fill... he's just not as good as some people build him up to be.

Little range?

You need to go watch "Pulp Fiction", "The Red Violin", and "Changing Lanes" back to back to back.  Range will have been demonstrated.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: RegularKarate on April 03, 2003, 03:18:21 PM
Quote from: polkablues
Little range?

You need to go watch "Pulp Fiction", "The Red Violin", and "Changing Lanes" back to back to back.  Range will have been demonstrated.

Well, I still haven't seen Red Violin yet, but I've seen Sam Jackson in most of his well known roles and like I said, he's good, but he still isn't the actor a lot of people build him up to be.  Pulp Fiction/Changing Lanes are poor examples of contrast because you can't compare those two and say "wow, that guy can play it all, 'angry, sometimes mellow hip-gangster' AND 'angry, sometimes mellow poor guy'"
Title: Ed norton
Post by: budgie on April 13, 2003, 06:23:05 AM
Here's the beginning of a good interview with Ed Norton, in which he talks about being an actor and its limitations, and the interviewer talks about what makes him a stand-out actor of his generation. Norton also talks about being well-adjusted, Fight Club, and taking time out to learn how to fly.


He who calls the shots

With his 1996 film debut, Edward Norton earned the tag 'finest actor of his generation'. But he's not satisfied with being just an actor. It's too limiting, he says, and it leaves you with no control over your own destiny. That's why he's also a screenwriter, director and, he tells Sally Vincent, the reason why he's taken up flying

Saturday April 12, 2003
The Guardian

 
Edward Norton is hardly there. A man-shaped occupant of an armchair, back to the light, a silhouette with nothing on its face. Actors can do this when they feel like it; not be there. Not switch on whatever it is they switch on when they want you to look at them. Marilyn Monroe used to do it as an exercise when she was studying the Method. She'd walk down the street, invisible as any other dumpy little nobody, then, click, turn herself on and ruin the lives of every man in the vicinity. She thought it was funny. With Norton, you get the feeling he's on off-mode because he hasn't called to mind that he, too, has got that knack.

It's not as though he's shy. If he was, he wouldn't reach for the glass jar of jelly beans on the table in front of him, tip out a palmful, convey them to his face and sit back, crunching. The body language says present and available, mouth mobile, chest open, legs splayed. But - and this is weird - your eyes follow the jelly bean jar back to the table and it's as if you've never seen a jujube before. How compelling they are, how shiny in their jar, red, green, yellow, purple, orange. How merry. How mesmerising. If you were a jelly bean hankering for serious attention, you'd want to put yourself in the way of a catalyst of the Norton class. Or if you were some luminary of the film-starring business - Brando, De Niro, Brad Pitt, Richard Gere, the Woodies Harrelson and Allen, Matt Damon, Robin Williams - you'd know the co-star from heaven when you bumped into him. Which explains why Norton's feet haven't touched the ground for the past seven years. He calls it "being lucky enough to be working" and hopes you'll leave it at that.

Not that Norton is taciturn. Far from it. He is, if anything, rather loquacious, as though this hologram has been programmed to protect itself from intrusion with a sound barrier of precision-turned, Ivy League-accented eloquence, using words such as "synergy", "autonomy" and "impracticable" while giving away little more than a faint aroma of the Pilgrim Fathers. A casual observer could glance at the pair of us and run away with the idea that we were having an intense conversation. Actors can do that, too. Create an impression. When they feel like it.

I doubt Norton can help himself. He has this conviction, frequently expressed, that an actor's credibility can be severely undermined by the proliferation of his personal details in the media. He seriously thinks that, if people knew he was raised in Maryland and has a mother and father and two siblings, it would hamper belief in the character he's playing. This elusive, wilful, chameleon quality also describes his screen presence. He is never instantly recognisable as the actor you've seen in a previous film. It's not as though he's in disguise, beyond sporting a bit of a beard, or he's combed his hair differently, nothing major, but it takes minutes to register, yes, there's Edward, even when you've done nothing all week but watch his movies, back to back. And I do mean that as a compliment.

His film debut, back in 1996, earned him his first Oscar nomination along with the vaguely unenviable tag "finest actor of his generation", a Hollywood entitlement bestowed upon young men who turn in a performance to knock your socks off while failing to be possessed of matinee idol looks. Primal Fear might have been specifically designed to test such a contender. It was one of those dual-personality trips, giving Norton the privilege of perfecting the simple, stammering altar boy who, before our very eyes, snaps into the psychopathic murderer he has convinced us he is not. My, how we jumped.

Unfortunately, as so often happens when someone pushes the right button, they are merely called upon to press it again. The film industry cried out for encores, inundating Norton with scripts featuring multiple personality crazies, culminating in the turgid drama of some poor soul with 37 selves. It was a challenge that Norton wisely ducked; instead he signed up for a musical. He couldn't resist the opportunity of working with Woody Allen. Everyone Says I Love You was as embarrassing a piece of vapidity as you could wish for if you wanted to clear your palate between courses. However, Norton managed to depict the all-singing, all-dancing preppy boyfriend in such a way as to preclude anyone ever doing so again for fear of unfavourable comparison. His masterstroke was in his dancing sequences. The trick was to dance while giving the impression that he couldn't really dance. And, at the same time, whenever he walked across the screen, he walked like Fred Astaire. Smooth, elegant, as though his feet were ever so slightly off the ground. Then, amateur dancing. Pure genius! In my opinion. It made Norton smile, anyway.


The rest is at http://www.film.guardian.co.uk/interview/interviewpages/0,6737,934898,00.html
Title: Ed norton
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 13, 2003, 11:27:38 AM
Quote from: RegularKarate
Quote from: polkablues
Little range?

You need to go watch "Pulp Fiction", "The Red Violin", and "Changing Lanes" back to back to back.  Range will have been demonstrated.

Well, I still haven't seen Red Violin yet, but I've seen Sam Jackson in most of his well known roles and like I said, he's good, but he still isn't the actor a lot of people build him up to be.  Pulp Fiction/Changing Lanes are poor examples of contrast because you can't compare those two and say "wow, that guy can play it all, 'angry, sometimes mellow hip-gangster' AND 'angry, sometimes mellow poor guy'"

He's great in Red Violin. Also... Caveman's Valentine, Unbreakable... and especially Jakie Brown and Sydney. C'mon.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: Camel Lights on April 13, 2003, 11:53:39 AM
i heartily recommend the guardian film website for the kind of breadth and insight so scarcely gleaned from certain contributors.

in an unrelated matter... mr. jones (B) - an intellectual query for you to puzzle over in your pyjamas:

why do you seek to assimilate the experiences of others into a brain so obviously unequipped to receive (and/or accept) the dialectic?

aw, shucks - i take it back. forget ednorton, i think you're the star, butterscotch, of your own private movie. and all the men and women, merely players.

< but he will moan, and scream, and whine
that it's his nature to opine!
to this i nod, and smile content,
for such is childhood's argument >


long live ed norton.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: meatball on February 23, 2004, 06:25:32 PM
..
Title: Ed norton
Post by: picolas on February 23, 2004, 07:42:59 PM
i was waiting for you to post.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: MacGuffin on January 17, 2005, 05:54:41 PM
Norton Casts Spell
Edward Norton takes on the title role in the Neil Burger drama The Illusionist.

Neil Burger has found his Illusionist. Oscar-nominated actor Edward Norton has signed on to star in the big screen adaptation of the Steven Millhauser short story "Eisenheim the Illusionist," which will start production this April in Prague.

The period piece stars Norton as a magician at the turn-of-the-century in Vienna. The lower-class magician falls in love with a woman who proves to be above his social class. After she gets engaged to a prince, the illusionist uses all of his mystical powers to win over the woman and undermine the state of the royal house of Vienna.

Bob Yari and Cathy Schulman will produce through the Yari Film Group company Bull's Eye Entertainment. Michael London is also producing through Michael London Productions, as are Brian Koppelman and David Levien. Koppelman and Levien produced Burger's first pic, Interview with the Assassin, and they brought the story to Burger and Norton.

Norton, repped by Endeavor, has been working on the indie Down in the Valley, co-starring Evan Rachel Wood. Norton received Oscar nominations for his work in Primal Fear and American History X. Other recent credits for the actor include The Italian Job, 25th Hour and Red Dragon.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: modage on January 17, 2005, 10:11:50 PM
ed norton needs a comeback.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: Gold Trumpet on January 18, 2005, 12:50:14 AM
A pretty historical thread, I must say. I'll still argue that Norton's a superficial actor though.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: soixante on January 18, 2005, 02:05:52 AM
In quick succession, Ed Norton did Primal Fear, Larry Flynt, American History X, Rounders and Fight Club, a winning streak few other actors can match.  He hasn't done anything good since 1999.  What happened?  The Score, Italian Job, 25th Hour -- Ed needs to make better choices.

He could still be the best actor of his generation.  He needs to work with better directors.  He needs to find better scripts.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: ono on January 18, 2005, 07:06:30 AM
...you obviously haven't seen 25th Hour.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: MacGuffin on January 18, 2005, 11:15:51 AM
Quote from: soixanteThe Score

The opportunity to work with DeNiro and Brando.

Quote from: soixanteItalian Job

Fulfill the contract obligation or be sued.

Quote from: soixante25th Hour -- Ed needs to make better choices.

He could still be the best actor of his generation.  He needs to work with better directors.  He needs to find better scripts.

Spike Lee is no slouch, and 25th Hour was one of the best films of 2002 named on many critics lists.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: Fernando on January 18, 2005, 12:30:54 PM
Quote from: MacGuffin
Spike Lee is no slouch, and 25th Hour was one of the best films of 2002 named on many critics lists.

And more importantly, by xixax members.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: Stefen on January 18, 2005, 01:39:20 PM
Think about it this way, with Norton not making anything for awhile. He really hasent been missed. He's overrated. There is only so many *sighs* in a performance I can take. He should team up with Ratner again.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: soixante on January 19, 2005, 02:38:54 AM
25th Hour -- a ponderous bore.  The sign of a bad filmmaker is someone whose point is evident five minutes before the sequence ends.  The opening of 25th Hour shows -- seemingly endlessly -- the ruins of Ground Zero.  This not only sets the tone of this joyless, one-dimensional film, but it is a metaphor for Ed Norton's character -- his life is in ruins.  OK, I got it -- and then the sequence drags on for what seems like an eternity.

In other words, Norton hasn't made a good film since Fight Club.

As for The Score, De Niro has made a lot of crap in the past 10 years, and Brando has done a lot of bad movies (like The Formula).  Sure, the thought of these "best actors of their respective generations" working together sounds promising -- on paper.  However, when Frank Oz is allowed to direct, you have an instant piece of mediocrity.

Once again, Fight Club is Norton's last good film.

The previous post describing his latest project doesn't sound promising.  He needs to work with a good director (I'm sorry, Spike Lee ain't good), and find a good script.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: MacGuffin on September 27, 2005, 09:22:23 PM
Norton, Farrell Have Pride
Stars team for cop drama.

Actors Edward Norton and Colin Farrell are teaming up to star in the New Line-based cop drama Pride and Glory. According to Variety, the high-profile thesps have joined the forthcoming film along with Noah Emmerich (Cellular, Beyond Borders, Frequency).

As the trade describes it, Pride and Glory is "a generational drama about a family of police officers in New York torn apart by a corruption scandal."

Norton would reportedly play a homicide detective who is assigned to investigate the precinct run by his older brother (Emmerich). Farrell plays his friend who, as it turns out, may also be corrupt.

Pride and Glory was scripted by Joe Carnahan (Narc) and will be directed by Miracle helmer Gavin O'Conner.

Principle photography on the drama is tentatively set to kickoff this January in New York City.
Title: Ed norton
Post by: squints on September 27, 2005, 09:57:00 PM
Sounds like serpico, if the poor fella had a family
Title: Re: Ed norton
Post by: MacGuffin on September 11, 2007, 09:59:17 PM
Norton, Pitt reteam for 'State of Play'
'Fight Club' duo to star in Universal adaptation
Source: Variety

Edward Norton is getting back in the ring with his "Fight Club" partner Brad Pitt.

Duo will star in "State of Play," Universal Pictures' adaptation of the British miniseries. Kevin Macdonald ("The Last King of Scotland") is directing the Matthew Michael Carnahan script.

Norton will play a congressman whose speedy political rise is threatened by an investigation into the death of his mistress. Pitt plays a politico-turned-journalist whose relationship with the solon is compromised when he oversees his newspaper's investigation into the murder and develops a relationship with the pol's estranged wife.

Project has been a high priority for U since the studio won an auction for rights to the six-hour mini written by Paul Abbott. Though Pitt has long been attached, he had been courted for other pics while Tony Gilroy worked on a rewrite. Pitt recently committed after that script was turned in, and the project is on track for a November start.

Andrew Hauptman will produce with Working Title partners Tim Bevan and Eric Fellner. Abbott is exec producer.

Norton will begin shooting "State of Play" days after he wraps "The Incredible Hulk" for Marvel Studios, with Universal releasing the Louis Leterrier-directed superhero film on June 13.
Title: Re: Ed norton
Post by: Kal on September 11, 2007, 11:23:19 PM
Cool to see Norton-Pitt together again, but I'm not so excited about the project... anybody here seen the original series?
Title: Re: Ed norton
Post by: MacGuffin on December 04, 2007, 11:26:09 PM
Edward Norton to star in 'Grass'
Actor takes on double duty in 'Leaves'
Source: Variety

Edward Norton is set to play dual roles in "Leaves of Grass," a comedic thriller to be directed in spring by Tim Blake Nelson, who wrote the script and will also act in the film.

Norton will play identical twins, one an Ivy League classics professorand the other a hedonistic pot-smoking career criminal. He'll make the film after completing the Universal drama "State of Play."

"Leaves of Grass" will be financed by Barbarian Films, which recently co-produced "Powder Blue." Bill Migliore, Norton and Nelson will produce. Norton and Migliore partner in Class 5 Films, which most recently produced "The Painted Veil" and "Down in the Valley."

Norton and Nelson recently starred together in "The Incredible Hulk," in which Norton plays the title character and wrote the script for Marvel and Universal. Nelson had already penned "Leaves of Grass" specifically for Norton, and they've been waiting for the right opportunity to do it.

"The challenge of playing twins for an actor is very special, and I was very flattered that Tim sent 'Leaves of Grass' to me," Norton said. "I liked it so much, and felt so strongly that it was a film Tim understood to his core, that I took it to my partners and suggested we produce it. This is exactly the kind of personal filmmaking that we set out to support."

Nelson, who directed "The Grey Zone" and "O," said Norton "would have been my first choice for either of these roles." If he'd said no, "there would have been no second choice."

Norton will next be seen in the Gavin O'Connor-directed Gotham cop drama "Pride and Glory," which New Line opens in March.
Title: Re: Ed norton
Post by: Pas on March 03, 2010, 03:48:26 PM
I started that Leaves of Grass movie it is looking pretty good let me tell you! Twice the Norton for the price of a single movie, you gotta love that. Pot-dealing Norton is more comedic than other smalltime criminals Norton have played...

it's all over the web since this afternoon you can check it out
Title: Re: Ed norton
Post by: matt35mm on March 04, 2010, 12:59:37 PM
I didn't feel like the film worked very well, but it wasn't uninteresting, either.  It's a strange mix of the Shakespearean, philosophy, and fairly lame screenwriting.

The lame screenwriting comes in the form of the formulaic--a love interest for the put-together professor, who's there to teach him how to feel, which is exactly the only reason that she's there.  Actually, everybody's there to teach this guy life lessons, in dialogue that strains to be profound while also trying to come off as just some good-old homespun philosophy.  Something about it doesn't really fit.  It wants to be graceful, but the effort that it takes to appear effortless shows through.  So something in the execution robs it of grace.

The philosophy is explicit, as the main character is a classical philosophy professor, and much of the movie has characters discussing philosophical ideas about the way people are.  None of it actually links up to philosophical texts, which is normally fine except for how much actual philosophical texts and famous philosophers are talked about.  A lot of philosopher's names are bandied about with not much purpose except, perhaps, to make the philosophy in the film seem more studied than it actually is.  There's not really any new insight that comes from this philosophical element, so the film basically features characters being broadly philosophical in their own way.

I didn't realize the Shakespearean influence until toward the end, and it mostly comes in the form of warring drug factions and how the violence is handled.  I probably shouldn't even call it Shakespearean, as what I'm referring to is really just a tone that reminds me of Shakespeare, in relation to the violence and matters of family, but more goofy than something like The Godfather.  The violence can be quite surprising at times when compared to other movies, simply because it doesn't always follow the normal movie formula of when violence ought to occur.

I quite liked Tim Blake Nelson's other movies, especially O.  There was something clunky in the execution here, though.  I'll give it credit for being full of ideas, even if I don't personally find any of them insightful.