Do-over?!

Cracker Jack

Sidekick
Joined
May 22, 2003
Messages
3,423
Reaction score
0
Points
31
This was posted at HM.COM by Bruno

Bruno said:
I just posted this here:

http://www.hulkmovie.com/news/06_09_06.htm

The following was originally posted on IFMagazine.com:

iF MAGAZINE: IRON MAN and THE INCREDIBLE HULK are the first Marvel produced films that Marvel is producing “in-house”, why these particular heroes?

AVI ARAD: We wanted to start this journey with absolutely top, top tier characters and IRON MAN is at the level of X-MEN and SPIDER-MAN and HULK. SPIDER-MAN is a league of its own, but after that you have X-MEN, IRON MAN, HULK. These are the big guns, and obviously we want to continue the train of success once we are making our own [films]. A lot of people are looking forward to IRON MAN and a lot of people are looking forward to the comic book version of the HULK. That’s the one we are making, and I think it will be incredibly satisfying. It will be big and awesome and a big ride.

iF: So will you be recasting HULK with completely new actors?

ARAD: It’s a “do-over”. I loved the HULK movie, it was just a different approach, and it wasn’t exactly the comic. We want to be much closer to the comic. It’s what we would rather do.

Bruno

Bruno is the webmaster at Hulkmovie.com. I don't think he'd post somethhing like this if it were a fake. That being said, I say

PLEASE, OH PLEASE let this be true. :up: Either way, sequel or "Do-Over" it's sounding more and more that we're going to see another Hulk movie in our life time. And that has got to be a good thing. Unless it sucks. :p :D
 
Well, i think it is completely stupid if they do this just 5 years after the original, if it isnt a sequel, then why rush so much to get it out. I would much rather have a direct sequel.
 
Cracker Jack said:
This was posted at HM.COM by Bruno



Bruno is the webmaster at Hulkmovie.com. I don't think he'd post somethhing like this if it were a fake. That being said, I say

PLEASE, OH PLEASE let this be true. :up: Either way, sequel or "Do-Over" it's sounding more and more that we're going to see another Hulk movie in our life time. And that has got to be a good thing. Unless it sucks. :p :D
I'm with you buddy! :up:

Less Incredible Sulk and more Incredible Hulk! :hulk:
 
I think this will be great. While I don't mind a direct sequel, if they want to start over, that's OK in my books. I just hope the public responds greatly so we can have future sequels afterwards.

As Cracker Jack said above, it looks like we're gonna see a new Hulk movie in the next couple of years and for that, I can only giva a :up:
 
While i'm not adverse to another Hulk in any form, i think it is stupid to do what is essentially a remake just five years after the original.
 
It doesn't read(atleast as far as I can discern from a short line of text which in itself isn't much to go on) like he meant a new origin. I think he meant in tone and how it presents itself(to the audience and how they market it).

Which is silly really, it's not a do-over. The film ended on a lighter note. I think he's just telling dissatisfied fans what they want to hear. Which is status quo for Avi Arad.:marv:

I hope the film has a decent sized budget so we can get some nice Hulk smash scenes. Atleast more money than the first. I still would love to have seen the full dog fight sequence Ang wanted to do before the lack of money nixed it. :(
 
I'm good either way. Bring on Blonsky! Sterns too!
 
I think y'all and AICN are reading way too much into this. I seriously doubt Universal would distribute a remake of their own movie that came out in 2003. It's going to be a follow-up, but they want to do it right this time.
 
Remaking Hulk would be crazy in my opnion.I liked the first movie and i think it showed just about everything an origin movie needs to show if not more.
 
if its a do-over,it wont be out until atleast 2015.
 
but i love the idea.
 
Superhero Hype! said:
I think y'all and AICN are reading way too much into this. I seriously doubt Universal would distribute a remake of their own movie that came out in 2003. It's going to be a follow-up, but they want to do it right this time.

agreed! :up:

hope thats right
 
They can start over with new actors and with a new style and focus without redoing the origin. The origin could be told during the credits for God's sake. No way will the start over from the beginning as if the first one didn't happen. That would be ridiculous. They could easily use what happened at the end of The Hulk to change the look of him considering his dad sucked some life out of him, etc...If they do...redo it...they should tell the origin perhaps in flashbacks. I want Eric Bana back.
 
AVEITWITHJAMON said:
While i'm not adverse to another Hulk in any form, i think it is stupid to do what is essentially a remake just five years after the original.

Yes. Yes it is. :down
 
Retroman said:
Remaking Hulk would be crazy in my opnion.I liked the first movie and i think it showed just about everything an origin movie needs to show if not more.

I agree, Just make a Hulk 2, don't go back into the past, go and keep it in Our time line ( around 2006).
 
Yeehaw!!!!!!!!!:up:
Say it ain't so!?


Would they really do another big budget Hulk movie and do it right this time. Personally I'd prefer if they just made a sequel and pretended the first one never existed and basically hired Weta for the effects and make a new smaller Hulk model and have a kick ass story, plus add Doc Sampson, Abomination or Creel into the mix. Plus cast a wimpy actor to play Bruce not, bloody Hector the Barbarian(not to knock the actor).
:up:
I said Yeehaw because I'm happy they finally admited they made a Turkey Turd of a movie.
 
WormyT said:
Personally I'd prefer if they just made a sequel and pretended the first one never existed

Sequel:

n 1: something that follows something else [syn: subsequence] 2: a part added to a book or play that continues and extends it [syn: continuation]

Its not a sequel if you decide to ignore the first film. :o

WormyT said:
and basically hired Weta for the effects

What was wrong with ILM?

WormyT said:
I said Yeehaw because I'm happy they finally admited they made a Turkey Turd of a movie.

Hulk 2003 was no masterpiece, but it wasn't terrible either (I rather enjoyed it)...it doesn't deserve to be treated like it was freakin' "Batman & Robin" or something...
 
LostSon88 said:
What was wrong with ILM?

Their effects were cartoony and not believable, IMO. I see them as being terribly overrated, and WETA has far surpassed them in recent years. Just my taste, though, I know loads of people still like ILM. Hulk looked like a big video game character, hardly ever convincing, and his movements were just bland.


LostSon88 said:
Hulk 2003 was no masterpiece, but it wasn't terrible either (I rather enjoyed it)...it doesn't deserve to be treated like it was freakin' "Batman & Robin" or something...

I thought it sucked, quite frankly, and I'm a fan of the character. And I think the general consensus is that it's not very good. This has to be the quickest 'redo' in movie history!
 
Hulk was a great film just not what most comic book fans expected. Forget what you know about the character. Did you enjoy the film on it's own merits. I did and I loved it. Now they're going to help us remember the character how we expected it.
 
Advanced Dark said:
Hulk was a great film just not what most comic book fans expected. Forget what you know about the character. Did you enjoy the film on it's own merits. I did and I loved it.....

I did, it's one of my favorite films. I really don't see why they want to re-do it.
 
it better not start with Banner not being able to turn into the hulk yet. That would have been the good thing about a direct sequel, he's hulk from the start. Also, Bana felt good as banner imo.
 
If this is a remake then who is hulk this time? Still Bana?

This should prove interesting. Ang Lees hulk never felt like a sequel type of film to me, more like a stand alone story.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"