ROTTEN TOMATOES: Cool New Cast Member for The Incredible Hulk

Cool New Cast Member for The Incredible Hulk

Tim Blake Nelson joins the Hulk-ing ensemble

by Scott Weinberg | July 27, 2007

And the casts for the new Marvel movies just keep getting better and better. This time around? The multi-talented Tim Blake Nelson has been cast as a pivotal villain in Louis Leterrier's The Incredible Hulk.

According to The Hollywood Reporter, Tim Blake Nelson will play a scientist known as Samuel Sterns. Marvel maniacs will no doubt recognize that name as "The Leader," a gamma-irradiated mega-genius with a giant head. Dang this should make for an entertaining movie.

Nelson, who's probably best known for Syriana, Minority Report and (especially) O Brother Where Art Thou, will join Edward Norton, Liv Tyler, Tim Roth, and William Hurt in Leterrier's "semi-sequel" to Ang Lee's oft-maligned Hulk. This one and Iron Man are expected to hit theaters next summer. Cool.

Source: The Hollywood Reporter

Related Items

Movie:	Syriana
	Hulk
	Minority Report
	O Brother, Where Art Thou?
Celeb:	Louis Leterrier
	Tim Blake Nelson
	Ang Lee
	Edward Norton
	Liv Tyler
	Tim Roth
	William Hurt

(1-19 of 19 posts) | Reply

bigbrother writes:
on Jul 27 2007 10:42 AM

I thought the new villain was The Abomination. Hopefully if they do have the Leader he'll only be given minimal screen time as he has to be one of the silliest villains ever. Seriously he looks like a green version of egghead from the 60's Batman series.

(Reply to this)

Product_of_You writes:
on Jul 27 2007 10:44 AM

So this is being treated like a sequel then? Damn, I thought it was going to be a complete reboot. One of the majors things I didn't like about the first movie was the appearance of The Hulk. I thought he was too big and just funny looking.

(Reply to this)

CannibalPenguins writes:
on Jul 27 2007 10:50 AM

Is Jennifer returning or not?

(Reply to this)

Gimy writes:
on Jul 27 2007 10:52 AM

well, "too big" as you say...is exactly how they wanted it. i have yet to hear anything different, as if they're going to change it. the whole "just a buff dude", like the tv show, isn't what anybody involved wants apparently. they want the 15 foot hulk who can jump miles at a time and can lift massive amounts of weight, like say...rosie odonnell.

i'm not sure how a straight up-sequel benefits the story though...mostly because of the cast change. then 'gain, it saves from the obvious slowness of telling the origins of the story. that usually screws with the speed of the movie. since its a "semi" sequel...i'm "semi" pumped to see it

(Reply to this)

H Tht Hs N Vwls writes:
on Jul 27 2007 11:10 AM

I had thought that Liv Tyler was taking over Jennifer Connely's role, if that's the case then no, I don't suppose she'll return. It's too bad because her and Eric Bana were the main things I liked about the first one...that and the 20 minutes that Hulk actually got to be in the movie.

(Reply to this)

BuckyUnderbelly writes:
on Jul 27 2007 11:34 AM

I gotta say ... the more I hear about this production the more hopeful I become. The new cast is an upgrade, in my opinion. (Though I will miss the PERFECTLY cast Sam Elliott.) I liked Eric Bana fine, but Ed Norton is certainly a world-class actor and physically he fits the character better as he's much "punier."

Liv Tyler is a better choice for Betty as well, I think. I've just never understood the whole Jennifer Connolly thing. I've never found her appealing. She seems like a nice enough person, but as a performer, she just doesn't light my world on fire. She always seems so wan, so exhausted and so unrelentingly bland. Not that Liv Tyler is Olivier ... but she certainly has more of a spark.

I'm not convinced that Louis Leterrier is the best choice as director though. (I've always said that The Hulk is one of the few properties in the world that would actually benefit from being directed by Michael Bay.) Leterrier's got some proving to do in my book. I LOVED the first Transporter movie. Clever, fun and gleefully kinetic. (Plus, one cannot dispute the absolute genius of featuring an oil fight in your movie. I mean, seriously ... it's got an OIL FIGHT!) But found myself REALLY disappointed with the sequel. Too much CG, not enough fight sequences, and don't even get me started on the silly, silly, silly movie physics (particularly in the driving and airplane stunts).

Though I do absolutely adore the Jet Li film Unleashed, which he also directed. But while Transporter and Unleashed get high grades from me, The Incredible Hulk is a very different kind of movie. It's not all martial arts and car chases ... it's a big, effects-laden green-screen movie. So my jury is still out, obviously. I hope he proves my fears are unfounded.

I have to admit, though, that the casting thus far is really impressive. And it's also encouraging to see the public acknowledgements by the producers and Marvel brass that the Ang Lee film was "flawed." ("HULK NOT SMASH!! HULK PONDER INEQUITIES OF EXISTENCE!!") They know what the problems were the first time around and they seem committed to doing a better job with this one. Let us hope ... let us hope.

(Reply to this)

Merlin235 writes:
on Jul 27 2007 11:54 AM

I think the problems of the first movie can be attributed to what the fan base expected, not the film itself. It was a fine film for what it was supposed to be, it just wasn't as much Hulk as everyone else wanted. But comic book movie fans would do ourselves a justice to stop complaining about that movie. Nothing makes us sound as childish as the stereotypes propose we are like complaining about how one of movies was 'too deep' and not 'enough smash.' Let it go already. I too though am looking forward to "The Incredible Hulk."

(Reply to this)

unbreakable_samurai writes:
on Jul 27 2007 12:28 PM

Wow I love this cast and director, Nelson's a great addition, I loved him in O Brother. This should be so much better than the first one.

(Reply to this)

Baccus83 writes:
on Jul 27 2007 12:35 PM

Jennifer Connolly is ten times the actress that Liv Tyler is. Not that it really matters for this film. Just thought I'd put my opinion out there.

(Reply to this)

monkeytot writes:
on Jul 27 2007 12:38 PM

lets nip these rumors in the butt, Peo-ple!! Connolley is NOT returning! i suspect they will get someone who looks like her but is cheaper too hire like Selma Blair. Now, on to next topic, pleae.

(Reply to this)

monkeytot writes:
on Jul 27 2007 12:39 PM

lets nip these rumors in the butt, Peo-ple!! Connolley is NOT returning! i suspect they will get someone who looks like her but is cheaper too hire like Selma Blair. Now, on to next topic, pleae.

(Reply to this)

oldnoakes writes:
on Jul 27 2007 01:19 PM

In reply to this comment (#979702)
Nothing makes us sound as childish as the stereotypes propose we are like complaining about how one of movies was 'too deep' and not 'enough smash.'

I haven't heard anyone say this, although I wasn't as much on the internet around the time it came out.

I think mutant poodles where the biggest part of the problem. The involvement of Banner's father could have worked if handled a little bit differently. And the comic pannels were interesting, but ultimately distracting. This was a good film, but not the best of the comic bunch. IMO, Hulk is a C list comic film like (like Daredevil and FF) but certainly not as low as D and F films: League of Extraordinary Gentleman, Blade, Spawn, Catwoman, Batman and Robin, etc. The Hulk was good enough to not feel like a waste of time (definitely glad I saw it in a discount theatre!) , but not worth buying it or going out of my way to see again. (If it was on TV and I had the time, I might consider it. If a friend owned it, I might borrow it.)

(Reply to this)

Elixor writes:
on Jul 27 2007 01:37 PM

I'm looking forward to this movie. The first one had issues, definately, but I can see this next one working. The only complaint I have so far is Liv Tyler. Horrible choice to follow Connely. She's not even in the same universe acting-wise or looks-wise.

(Reply to this)

Dinalfos 2 writes:
on Jul 27 2007 01:51 PM

The cast is good, but the one thing that bugs me is the sucky director and the mediocre screenwriter. The first one was flawed, but still very good. I'd love to see them continue THAT story, with a handful of minor adjustments.

(Reply to this)

Sputnik99 writes:
on Jul 27 2007 03:41 PM

The first Hulk movie is just like the recent King Kong movie: not too bad if you skip the first hour of it.

I have to say, every time I imagine the Leader being in a movie, I smirk and almost laugh. What a dumb character. Oh well. Guess he's a gamma groupee, too, huh?

Abomination: What are we gonna do today, Leader?

Leader: The same thing we always do, Abomination...TRY TO TAKE OVER THE WORLD!

I hope the Abomination looks good. I'm not a Liv Tyler fan, but she'll do.

(Reply to this)

charlieahinds writes:
on Jul 27 2007 04:39 PM

who cares about this? the first hulk was nearly the worst movie i have ever seen. i loved the superman bounds across the desert. it was just awful. why make a sequel to an awful movie? id rather see daredevil 2 or something. everything besides xmen 1,2 and spiderman 1,2 and the punisher are crap

(Reply to this)

hunch51984 writes:
on Jul 28 2007 11:21 PM

man hearing about the cast for The Incredible Hulk and Iron Man, I cant wait for next summer, these movies look really promising.

(Reply to this)

Jarmir writes:
on Mar 08 2008 02:25 PM

Last time I saw the Leader in a comic book (some time ago), they had changed his looks, and he looked nowhere near as silly as he used to. If they go with that design (more of a mutated, gnarly look than the old mile-high-forehead thing), I can see him being a wonderful addition to the film. He's a cool villain, he just used to look ... stupid.

(Reply to this)

RottenTomatoes.com