View Single Post
Old 02-28-2013, 10:42 AM   #63
JeetKuneDo
Guitarist
 
JeetKuneDo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,448
Default Re: Share your wildest dreams for the Marvel Cinematic Universe

Quote:
Originally Posted by JB-the-Hunter View Post
Are you saying Iron Man is really a Tony Stark movie? And Captain America was a Steve Rogers movie? Because Iron Man and Captain America both had as much screen time in their own movies as Hulk did in his. The problem with Hulk movies isn't the amount of time Banner is on screen, the problem is that Hulk is never given anything interesting to do other than fight.
Bad examples. Stark and Rogers are Iron Man and Cap....Banner and the Hulk are two different people.
Quote:
Also, you don't have to talk (or talk a lot) to have personality. Hulk in the Avengers had plenty of personality.
Did he really?

The problem arises when the character SHOULD be speaking and he just stands there staring at everyone. (Hulk and Betty in the cave, group around Iron Man after he fell) That's when the audience gets the feeling he's just a CGI effect instead of a real character.
Quote:
Caesar in Rise of the Planet of the Apes did as well. I guarantee a movie with a chatty Hulk would not go over well at all with the general audience.
A guarantee based on what? The fact that it's never ever been tried?
Quote:
Not unless the dialogue is extremely carefully written. CGI characters who talk don't have a good history. Gollum, Dobby and Yoda are rare exceptions, and only because they have speech patterns and voices that make it easier to accept creatures like them talking as much as they do.
Since those examples are from some of the highest grossing movies in history I think it's safe to say audiences don't have a problem with talking CGI characters. Maybe if you give the CGI character a personality, the audience won't be sitting there thinking "that's a CGI character" because nothing else is going on with him.
Quote:
That is not the reason people loved Hulk in The Avengers at all, that's the reason you made up in your head to make sense of why people loved a portrayal thatyou didn't.
We'll see. It'll be a waste of time, but if they try a solo Hulk movie with Ruffalo the audience will go right back to being bored with the Hulk and everyone will wonder what happened. That's my official prediction.
Quote:
The actual reasons they loved him so much is because one, Banner actually WAS an interesting character in this movie thanks to Joss Whedon's writing. Don't believe me? Read any review, Mark Ruffalo was one of the most praised performances in the film. Two, because the CGI was much more well done in this movie than any previous Hulk. Hulk was actually believably there and everything he did in the movie felt very real. Three, because Hulk had a lot more personality than ever before in live action and had a lot of interesting interactions with different characters.
I agree with the last point. (Same as mine) The CGI in the first movie was fine too....around the same time as Gollum and no one had a problem with him....because he wasn't a walking special effect.

__________________
Uplift the entire genre instead of attempting to transcend it~T"Challa
JeetKuneDo is offline   Reply With Quote