when the trailer for Hulk played at Iron Man last night, there was a collective groan from the crowd when they showed the Hulk, most people were saying the same thing he looks so lame/fake.
I really look for it to not do much better than the last one.
why Marvel didnt realize most people's grip with the last one was the Hulk himself i dont know.
they shoulda got like Michael Clarke Duncan and had him bulk up and went from there..
As mentioned before, I tend to agree that the studio's missing the boat by over CGI'ing the Hulk.
I think the thing to do is get a bodybuilder type (ala Lou Ferrigno), get him made up as the Hulk, and then use CGI only to make him appear bigger in the scenes (that is, seven foot tall instead of six foot tall, sort of the opposite of what Peter Jackson did with the Hobbits in LotR).
All they really need to do is something not unlike the intro to the TV show during the opening credits, setting forth how Dr. Banner was trying to tap into hidden human strength, received an accidental overdose of gamma radiation and is now a fugitive/monster.
This "Hulk," directed by Louis Leterrier, will be a hit, no doubt, but it’s quite a bit darker than "Iron Man." It also comes with some baggage, as star Edward Norton attempted to rewrite the original script by Zak Penn. Norton does not get screen credit for his efforts, although I’m told that many of his revisions are felt in this final version.
Norton plays Bruce Banner, the scientist who somehow becomes infected with a concoction that turns him into the beastly Hulk. William Hurt is his nemesis, an army general whose daughter, played by Liv Tyler, is in love with both Bruce and the Hulk.
All the actors are fine, and Tyler, especially, brings a welcome jolt to the patented Marvel superhero’s patient girlfriend. Tim Roth is well-cast as a villain who attempts to out-Hulk Banner in several fights, and Tim Blake Nelson makes an excellent ally as a scientist who thinks he can help Banner. Both Tims are underrated presences in studio films and are refreshing to watch.
There are some nice touches. The movie starts with Banner watching actor Bill Bixby in "The Courtship of Eddie’s Father." The very likeable, late Bixby played Banner in the "Hulk" TV series. Also, Lou Ferrigno, the Hulk from that show, gets a cameo. So does Marvel creator Stan Lee. All that gives the film a comfortable introduction.
The new film has nothing whatsoever to do with Ang Lee’s failed "Hulk" from 2003. That movie was so unmemorable that no one at Tuesday night’s showing could recall who played the main roles.
Norton, like Robert Downey Jr. in "Iron Man" and Christian Bale as Batman, ushers in this new generation of the thinking man’s superhero. Unlike the others, he is not slam-dunk handsome, but that doesn’t seem to matter.
"Incredible Hulk" ends with a surprise twist. Maybe you’ve heard about it, but I’m not going to give it away. All you need to know is you must stay till the end of the film to see it. What it means, exactly, is unknown, but rest assured, sequels are on their way.
"Incredible Hulk" ends with a surprise twist. Maybe you’ve heard about it, but I’m not going to give it away. All you need to know is you must stay till the end of the film to see it. What it means, exactly, is unknown, but rest assured, sequels are on their way.
The guy who was messing with Banner's blood turns into The Leader and you guys already know about the Tony Stark scene.
I don't think so, but I could be wrong. I think it was just the mention of the program and serum and that is how he "shows up.". At one point they were going to have him make an appearance in the movie, but that got cut out.
"Batman is only meaningful as an answer to a world which in its basics is chaotic and in the hands of the wrong people, where no justice can be found. I think it's very suitable to our perception of the world's condition today... Batman embodies the will to resist evil" -Frank Miller
"Conan, what's the meaning of life?" "To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women!" -Conan the Barbarian
"Well, yeah." -Jason E. Perkins
"If I had a dime for every time Pariah was right about something I'd owe twenty cents." -Ultimate Jaburg53
"Fair enough. I defer to your expertise." -Prometheus
Mount Olympus never had such a potent gang as Marvel Comics, whose vast pantheon ranges from Hollywood A-lister Spider-Man to the murky shape-shifting process server Ditto.
Now producing its own film adaptations for all but a few previously licensed superheroes, Marvel Studios unveils "The Incredible Hulk" on the heels of blockbuster "Iron Man," whose 2010 sequel will be followed by an ambitious Marvel lineup.
Headlining their own upcoming movies are Norse thunder god Thor, super soldier Captain America and bug impersonator Ant-Man, those adventures culminating in 2011's Marvel all-star tale "The Avengers."
With an estimated 5,000 characters and a wealth of stories dating back nearly 70 years, Marvel could spin an endless web of big-screen yarns.
"It's inexhaustible," said Gale Anne Hurd, a producer on "The Incredible Hulk" and Ang Lee's critically drubbed 2003 take on the character, "Hulk." "What I love is, Marvel is now controlling Marvel's destiny. They are the greatest caretakers of the characters and the stories."
Until "Iron Man," the company watched big movie studios count their millions on superpowered comic adaptations of Spidey, X-Men, Fantastic Four and other Marvel properties. Marvel made some cash by licensing the characters for films, but it was a pittance compared to what studios hauled in on such billion-dollar franchises.
Following George Lucas' "Star Wars" formula, Marvel now finances movies itself and hires studios to release them for a fee, Paramount distributing "Iron Man," Universal releasing "The Incredible Hulk."
Marvel keeps all of the profits and retains lucrative rights for toys and other merchandise based on the films.
"The financial upside on a movie like `Iron Man' or `Incredible Hulk' is multiples of multiples of what we had in the old arrangement," said David Maisel, chairman of Marvel Studios, a division of Marvel Entertainment Inc. "We have the power to greenlight our movies. We set our schedule. We're not reliant on a third party."
A few elite franchises — among them Sony's "Spider-Man" and 20th Century Fox's "Fantastic Four" and "X-Men" with its upcoming "Wolverine" spinoff — remain under those studios' control.
That still leaves legions of superheroes for Marvel to put on screen.
Iron Man was a beloved character among fans but far from a household name to general audiences. The comic-book gods smiled on his movie adaptation, though, as all the ingredients came together to create an instant Hollywood franchise.
The manic charm of Robert Downey Jr. made billionaire weapons designer Tony Stark as interesting in a business suit as he was inside the metal contraption he builds to fight bad guys. Downey's own stints in rehab added a nice nuance to the movie's boozy Stark.
Director Jon Favreau struck an ideal balance between action and character development, resulting in one of the best-reviewed entries in the onslaught of comic adaptations.
After a nearly $100 million opening weekend in May, "Iron Man" is closing in on $300 million, a mark previously reached only by the "Spider-Man" flicks among comic-book movies.
Though the Hulk was more widely known than Iron Man from the comic books and the TV series starring Bill Bixby, no one in Hollywood expects his new movie to put up those kinds of numbers.
"Previews of this film have been mediocre. The buzz seems to be lacking," said Mike Hickey, an analyst who follows Marvel for Janco Partners.
The Hulk has been a problem child on the big-screen. The 2003 version, which starred Eric Bana as scientist Bruce Banner and featured a cartoonish Hulk hopping around in the desert, opened with a whopping $62.1 million weekend, then a record for June debuts.
But word of mouth was bad, and the audience quickly dried up, leaving one of Marvel's standard-bearers in Hollywood limbo.
"It was a noble experiment, I think, that first film, but I, like much of the audience, left wanting a lot more than what we got," said Kevin Feige, Marvel Studios' president of production.
The new movie is more action-oriented, clocking in at well under two hours, nearly 30 minutes shorter than Lee's dark, ponderous version.
As with "Iron Man," Marvel cast an acclaimed actor, Edward Norton, as Banner, the guy who turns into a not-so-jolly green giant when angry. The story emulates the TV show, with Banner a fugitive, and it gives him real villains to battle, including Tim Roth as Emil Blonsky, a soldier transformed into the Hulk's huge nemesis, the Abomination.
Roth did not see Lee's "Hulk" but said he expects the new movie will satisfy fans looking for spectacle.
"Our thing opens with a big action sequence. That's probably going to set the tone with the audience," Roth said.
While Norton took an active role in reshaping the story and rewriting the screenplay, the notoriously finicky actor almost became a liability after word leaked out that he, director Louis Leterrier and Marvel executives disagreed over the final cut of the movie.
Norton, who typically does little press, declined an interview for this story. The filmmakers downplayed any differences, saying the usual discussions that take place as movies near the finish line were blown out of proportion.
"It was just somebody, somewhere, somehow heard we were arguing, but we were not arguing," Leterrier said. "We were having a meeting, and maybe somebody walked in and heard Edward saying, `I really want this scene back in.' But there was no argument."
There is no argument that Marvel's move to finance its own movies has paid off, at least so far. A month after "Iron Man" opened, Marvel Entertainment's stock was trading at an all-time high of about $36 a share.
Analysts take a wait-and-see attitude about whether the strategy will work over the long haul. While Marvel plans to make two movies a year, there is a two-year lag before its next releases, "Iron Man 2" and "Thor."
"That's a big hiccup, to have no movies next year," analyst Hickey said. "They did a phenomenal job with `Iron Man.' I think the jury's still out, but the initial read is positive."
The Marvel logo will be in front of audiences with next year's "Wolverine" from Fox and this fall's vigilante thriller "Punisher: War Zone" from Lionsgate, which retains the rights to that Marvel franchise.
A clear benefit Marvel has gained by making its own movies is creative control. Comic-book fans are perpetually wary that Hollywood will mess up their favorite characters. With Marvel calling the shots, fans can rest a little easier that the movies will remain true to their origins.
Liked it much better than the 1st. CGI was better than I expected it to be. Losta nice nods to the TV show and better-than-casual Hulk fans.
Norton was very effective. Live Tyler was easy on the eyes and didn't get on my nerves. Tim Roth was very cool as was William Hurt as Thunderbolt. Even the CGI emoting done by Hulk was very good.
Don't stay thru the credits...all the stuff you want to see happens in the movie.
If Iron Man was a 9/10, then Incredible Hulk was 7.5/10.
Oderint, dum metuant.
You are a god damned idiot, you know that? You ought to be smacked upside your dumb-fuck head, even after all these years. Shame on you!
It looks like "The Incredible Hulk" has exceeded everyone's expectations. When the numbers come in this afternoon, look for the Edward Norton-Liv Tyler Marvel comic spectacle to have reeled in around $60 million this weekend.
That means Marvel comics' Stan Lee, using first Paramount with "Iron Man" and now Universal with "Hulk," has had the biggest hits of the spring back to back.
Idiot reporter apparently doesn't realize that Stan Lee doesn't run Marvel studios.
"Batman is only meaningful as an answer to a world which in its basics is chaotic and in the hands of the wrong people, where no justice can be found. I think it's very suitable to our perception of the world's condition today... Batman embodies the will to resist evil" -Frank Miller
"Conan, what's the meaning of life?" "To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women!" -Conan the Barbarian
"Well, yeah." -Jason E. Perkins
"If I had a dime for every time Pariah was right about something I'd owe twenty cents." -Ultimate Jaburg53
"Fair enough. I defer to your expertise." -Prometheus
Fucking aweshome movie! Norton played the part well. The origin was well handled, being summed up in the first minute of the movie. Followed by a very special blink-and-you'll-miss-it cameo from Bill Bixby (yes, he's still dead). If you liked Iron Man and you're not Pariah, you'll love Incredible Hulk. Go see it.
caught it yesterday. it was very much awesome. maybe a shade behind ironman. but its nice to see the hulk get a good movie (damn you ang lee )
big_pimp_tim-made it cool to roll in the first damn place! Mon Jun 11 2007 09:27 PM-harley finally rolled with me "I'm working with him...he's young but, there is much potential. He can apprentice with me and then he's yours for final training. He will remember the face of his father...
Some day, Knutreturns just may be the greatest of us all...."-THE bastard
Good thing too, 'cuz this piece of shit was a piece of shit.
I knew better than to take the risk with another Norton movie after The Illusionist so I have no one to blame but myself.
I cannot, for the life of me, figure out how this movie is being compared to a film as decent as Iron Man.
another pariah seal of approval.
big_pimp_tim-made it cool to roll in the first damn place! Mon Jun 11 2007 09:27 PM-harley finally rolled with me "I'm working with him...he's young but, there is much potential. He can apprentice with me and then he's yours for final training. He will remember the face of his father...
Some day, Knutreturns just may be the greatest of us all...."-THE bastard
Originally Posted By: Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man
you didn't like Fight Club or American History X?
Fight Club was made pre-Illusionist.
your point? he said he didn't like Norton movies so I asked about the two famous ones.
Quote:
And seeing as how I didn't appreciate American History X's propaganda, no I didn't like it very much. I'll say he acted pretty well in it though.
"propaganda?" the whole point of the movie was about how hatred consumed him and how that hatred had destructive consequences for his life and family. If it had a stance it was anti-hate anti-violence. what exactly do you dislike about that message?
Originally Posted By: Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man
your point? he said he didn't like Norton movies so I asked about the two famous ones.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
I knew better than to take the risk with another Norton movie after The Illusionist so I have no one to blame but myself.
Meaning his performance has gone down-hill since then.
I actually find that it started with 25th Hour, but The Illusionist just solidified his mediocrity.
Quote:
"propaganda?" the whole point of the movie was about how hatred consumed him and how that hatred had destructive consequences for his life and family. If it had a stance it was anti-hate anti-violence.
Yes. And that message was propaganda-laden. The movie posited that all of his hate was born of conservative ideals and anti-socialist tendencies.
When he gets out of prison, it's not just the hate he loses. All of his opinions change. It outright stated that one lead to the other.
"propaganda?" the whole point of the movie was about how hatred consumed him and how that hatred had destructive consequences for his life and family. If it had a stance it was anti-hate anti-violence.
Yes. And that message was propaganda-laden. The movie posited that all of his hate was born of conservative ideals and anti-socialist tendencies.
When he gets out of prison, it's not just the hate he loses. All of his opinions change. It outright stated that one lead to the other.
i disagree with your interpretation of the movie. But to be fair I only saw it once when it came out. So my memory may not be 100% accurate on any political messages, but I don't remember anything other than hatred as the core theme.
i dint like the propaganda in fight club, to me it seemed like a vehicle to push Amish rights.
as far as american history x though, i just couldnt buy norton as being mean, evil, or tough, he seemed like a nerd trying to act mean, evil, and tough....
Missing: an eight-foot-tall green man wearing ripped purple pants and missing his feet.
Police say a promotional statue for the movie "The Incredible Hulk" disappeared from its spot in front of a local theater last week.
Lowell Police Capt. James McPadden said the statue is probably in some kid's bedroom. But he thinks more than one person was involved and that a car or pickup truck was needed to whisk it away.
The statue is missing its feet because it was bolted to a platform and the thief snapped it off at the ankles.
At least we know it wasn't rex. He would have stolen the feet for his bedroom and left the rest of the statue.
)
