Natalie Portman Officially Signs On for 'Thor'

Marvel has made it official: Natalie Portman will play Jane Foster in Thor. In the comics, Jane was a nurse that Thor's alter ego, Dr. Donald Blake, falls in love with. This role could be different from the one that had Jessica Biel as the front runner, but then again, that was just a rumor. It did include the caveat that the role would not be Jane Foster, so perhaps there's still a chance Biel winds up in the Asgard portions of the film. It would be interesting to see two sides of the same character involved with two women in the same movie. Maybe not a superhero movie, mind you, but it adds a certain dynamic. Marvel says the Jane Foster character is being updated for the film, which will co-star Star Trek's Chris Hemsworth as Thor and Tom Hiddleston as Loki. Kenneth Branagh will direct Thor, one of Marvel's big charges for summer 2011. Portman brings not just her bona fides as an Oscar nominee but the kind of credibility the cast for this movie simply hasn't had yet, nothing against Hemsworth and Hiddleston. Usually, we'll see a stout presence as the villain, and that goes back to Gene Hackman as Lex Luthor. In fact, among heroes in Marvel and DC movies, I believe only Robert Downey Jr. and Halle Berry have Oscar nominations. Correct me if I'm wrong about that. Villains, on the other hand: Nicholson, Ledger, McKellen, Hackman, Dafoe, Bridges, Thomas Haden Church, Kevin Spacey, and so on. While not portraying a villain, Portman does give the ensemble a much needed boost. Thanks to Big Picture reader J. Williams for the tip.

Comments

[D]

George Clooney, Edward Norton, Nic Cage, Sam Jackson and Anna Paquin all have Oscar noms (though Jackson only appeared in about 30 seconds of Iron Man and Paquin, while one of the X-Men, wasn't all that heroic in those films so you may not want to count them). Of note is the fact that off all the superheros only Cage, Downey, Norton and. if include them, Jackosn and Paquin were nominated before there turn as superheros.

[Get The Big Picture]

Yeah, that's what I meant, nominated before playing the superheroes. I forgot Cage twice, once for his Oscar and once in that abortion called Ghost Rider.

[D]

On an unrelated note, Thor is scheduled to be released on 5/20/11 which is only two weeks after Spider-Man 4. I find it weird that Marvel would release a new property that soon after a sequel to its most successful franchise.

[MRPigg]

Does Gwyneth Paltrow count? She wasn't the super hero, but an integral part of the heroes sucess (and the sucess of the film, in my humble opinion).

[Get The Big Picture]

No, Paltrow doesn't count. Then you'd have to let in Ned Beatty, Morgan Freeman, Michael Caine, Cliff Robertson, all of 'em. Terrence Howard, too. I'm just referring to the hero-villain match ups.

Also...regarding Spider-Man, I would think it has something to do with Spider-Man not being a Marvel Studios product. Since the company became involved in producing films independently, which began with Iron Man, I'm not sure what the exact involvement is with Spidey and X-Men properties.

[D]

Yeah, I know the Spidy flicks is not actually produced by Marvel but it still seems like it would make sense for them to move Thor back a few weeks. I mean if Thor keeps its current date it is going to be completely overshadowed by Raimi and Co.

[MRPigg]

It will only be overshadowed by Raimi's film if Spider-Man 4 is more like Spider-Man 2 and less like Spider-Man 3. Right now there is no guarantee of that. Crowded months are won by the better films, like Iron Man last year and Star Trek this year.

At this point, I don't think any of the studios are creatively worried about going up against a new Spider-Man movie.

[D]

Sorry to keep posting on this topic, but I just thought of another pre-superhero Oscar nominee: Ben Affleck. True it was for screenplay not acting but worth mentioning. And that is a decent point MRPigg but it still seems like a mistake to me to even take that risk. Maybe it's just because I don't have much faith in Thor as a film.