website tracking
Search The Big Picture

« 'Twilight' DVD In Stores March 21st | Main | Roundtable Interviews: The Actresses »
Wednesday
14Jan2009

Emily Blunt Eyed for Black Widow in 'Iron Man 2'

DateWednesday, January 14, 2009 at 3:57PM
With one key role left in Iron Man 2, the rumors are now circulating that Emily Blunt is Marvel's pick to play Natasha Romanoff/The Black Widow in the sequel, due in theaters in May 2010.

Our own preference is Olga Kurylenko from Quantum of Solace, but Blunt's a strong choice, too. I'm more concerned with her action chops than her acting chops, a situation that would've reversed itself if Kurylenko was up for the role, and I have no idea if she is or was.

If the Variety article is legit, this is another high profile addition to a film that has added Don Cheadle, Mickey Rourke, and Sam Rockwell in the past few months, but is it one too many? Remember what happened when Spider-Man 3 played around with too many villains...

Should she be cast, Blunt will play a Soviet spy who in the comic seduces Tony Stark (RDJ) for all the wrong reasons. Her addition also lends some credence to the idea that Crimson Dynamo will be in the film, but we won't go into that entire backstory here.

Widow's an interesting character - there's even some Wolverine crossover - and she's not pure evil like some of the others. There are times in her Marvel arc where she's fighting alongside some of your favorite heroes. So, I'm happy they're introducing her, but juggling all those angles has always been troublesome for Marvel.

Share/Save/Bookmark
AuthorColin Boyd | | in , , , , , | Print ArticlePrint Article | | Comment3 Comments |

Reader Comments (3)

So...I'm starting to worry about this movie. First Terrence Howard is out, and I really liked him. Not that I mind Don Cheadle, but I thought Terrence was pretty great. Now, they're trying to throw in like forty villains. I do remember what happened with Spidey 3, and I was so ridiculously disappointed because the second movie was soooo amazing. One of my favorite sequels ever. I dunno, I think it's better to stick with one villain and make that be as great as you can make it rather than go the Spiderman route and bite off more than you can chew. But I guess let's just hope they can pull it off.

Wednesday, January 14, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterLillian James

Exactly, Lillian. More villains only means a bigger, messier third act. It was also the most lackluster part of The Dark Knight, if anyone wants to weigh the good vs. the bad in that movie. More isn't better; it's just more.

Wednesday, January 14, 2009 | Registered CommenterColin Boyd

She might play as a sort of ally as opposed to a villain.. Black Widow has kind of played both sides, and currently in comics I believer that she is a hero. Either way it does seem like they're going to over do it.. Making Harry Osborn be a good guy at the end certainly didn't save Spidey 3

Friday, January 16, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterJustin

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>