Is this going to be exactly like the TV series?

[The Hulk]

Nerd.

woah, good one. im at a loss as to what to say in reaponse. quick wit hey. who would of know.

 

[The Joker_1000]

woah, good one. im at a loss as to what to say in reaponse. quick wit hey. who would of know.

Great spelling & sarcasm there.

 

[The Hulk]

Great spelling & sarcasm there.

its not my spelling, its my typing. and really, like thats going to phase me. try harded jerk wad

 

[The Joker_1000]

Seriously though, I'm going to leave now & be the bigger man. I know I'm a better man than you'll ever be because you just want to try your best to start conflicts & that's not what I'm here for. I came here to discuss this movie & if all you came here to do is start an argument, then God help you & anyone else who is just like that.

 

[Savage]

Nerd.

^^This is what irony looks like.

 

[Dirty Harry]

Yup, so your one of the people who thought the first movie sucked, go figure. And so, a tv show from the early 80's that had all of 10 minutes of Hulk in it in a good episode. And what cartoon are you referring to, the other one from the 80's that ran with Spider-man and his Amazing Friends? Because the last cartoon that was out in the mid-90's was heavily based off the comics at the time, even including the grey Hulk.

I bet if we do, it will be a big hit. the first film had about 30 minutes of Hulk scenes in it. Biggest complaint myself and other Hulk fans who liked it said after seeing it?"Needed MORe Hulk".

And funny thing is, box office wise, the more traditional and respectful to the comic source material a film is, the bigger the success.

The Ang movie didn't need more Hulk, it needed a better Hulk. Un-heroic, baby-faced, Stay-Puft Hulk just didn't cut it. Only a few brief moments during his total screen time in that entire film approached the true power that is The Incredible Hulk. And contrary to what you say, I believe too much Hulk is a bad thing. I don't want to just see the Hulk run around and smash crap for two hours. Overkill; familiarity breeds contempt; seen it, etc., etc. I can get that fix playing Hulk: Ultimate Destruction.

I think much of the delight in seeing the Hulk destroy things comes from the build up of the tension in and around Banner beforehand, leading up to that 'last straw' - when he loses control and the beast within him erupts like big green volcano. Don't get me wrong though. I can't wait to see the Hulk destroy some major sections of real estate and whoop some badguy ass, but too much is too much. Like a cake that's all icing and no cake.

I think your theory that sticking close = success is thin ice, at best. The first two 'X-Men' films were major box office smashes, yet Singer & Co. took HUGE liberties with practically all of the characters in various ways: origin, time-line placement, dress & uniform, etc. Same exact thing with every other superhero film, really. Even the beloved Reeves 'Superman' made tweaks to the source material. The difference in success vs. crapola is in the way it's approached. It must: 1) treat the source material with dignity, 2) play it straight rather than going for cheap laughs, and 3) make the characters 'real' rather than 2-dimensional caricatures. If it can do all this in a way that can still appeal to non-CB fans then it should do well financially and critically, and please the less-hypercritical fanboys among us.

BTW... any time an existing non-comedic character (comics, TV, etc.) is played for laughs it should send up an instant 'red flag' that the folks involved either have no clue, or no respect... or both.

I honestly don't think that a 100% faithful adaption would EVER be well received by anyone other than CB junkies. There's just too much stuff to cram into a single picture or even series/trilogy. Unless you know it like the back of your hand, you're lost in seconds. Hardly a way to achieve box office success and ensure a long-running franchise. Like it or not, no matter how widespread we think we are, the fact of the matter is that non-CB fans make up the vast majority of the movie-going public, by a wide margin. If you can't adapt a CB hero and his/her backstory into something that anyone can follow and appreciate, you're sunk. You'll walk away with the most faithfully-adapted flop in history.

Take the FF movie Corman did in the early 90's. Folks who've seen it (not me) say it is much more faithful to the core concepts of the FF than the two recent adaptions, but I doubt it would have done well. (Although that would be more Corman's fault for trying to commit such an ambitious idea to film for $1.98 than for pure heart and good intentions.) And regarding 'X-Men,' despite what a lot of haters say, I think most audience members (non-CB fans) would have broke out in gales of laughter if Wolverine had stepped on screen in his traditional blue & yellow skintight costume and mask. What looks great on a bright, four-color comic panel often looks goofy on-screen.

There are exceptions of course. Reeves' Superman looked much better in his bright tights than the depressing maroon & Thalo blue suit Bryan Singer gave him. Same goes for Spidey. I think the suit tweaks looked okay, but weren't really needed. On the other hand, Ang's Hulk looked too green. Bright day-glo green looks nice in a comic and on Kermit the Frog, but not the Hulk. The LL version seems headed back in the right direction by adding gray to the green, and making it a darker hue.

The really sad / crazy thing about all this is that no one will be totally happy no matter what the film is like. Some will be ga-ga over it; others will decry it as celluloid diarrhea. The majority will probably like some parts and not others... and all of these impressions from watching the exact same movie!

Every fan has a perfect version of the movie in their head, and most likely everyone's 'brain film' will resemble very little of what we see next June, so there are bound to be haters & complaints. I fear I may become one of these, as the Hulk is my fav hero, and so I go in with high expectations and mental "must-haves" that probably won't see a frame of film, just like I did with Ghost Rider. As long as most of what's on screen jingles my bells, then I'll forgive the rest and like (or love) it. However, if I see more wrong than right then I'll be back here screaming to the Heavens.

I just hope I'll be crying tears of joy next summer rather than tears of sorrow.

 

[Cracker Jack]

Key word: Was.

Enough with the Homage crap, anyone else want to see fresh takes on some portrayals?

I wouldn't mind if they'd pay HOMAGE to the comic book.

 

[Bannerless Hulk]

The Ang movie didn't need more Hulk, it needed a better Hulk. Un-heroic, baby-faced, Stay-Puft Hulk just didn't cut it. Only a few brief moments during his total screen time in that entire film approached the true power that is The Incredible Hulk. And contrary to what you say, I believe too much Hulk is a bad thing. I don't want to just see the Hulk run around and smash crap for two hours. Overkill; familiarity breeds contempt; seen it, etc., etc. I can get that fix playing Hulk: Ultimate Destruction.

I think much of the delight in seeing the Hulk destroy things comes from the build up of the tension in and around Banner beforehand, leading up to that 'last straw' - when he loses control and the beast within him erupts like big green volcano. Don't get me wrong though. I can't wait to see the Hulk destroy some major sections of real estate and whoop some badguy ass, but too much is too much. Like a cake that's all icing and no cake.

I think your theory that sticking close = success is thin ice, at best. The first two 'X-Men' films were major box office smashes, yet Singer & Co. took HUGE liberties with practically all of the characters in various ways: origin, time-line placement, dress & uniform, etc. Same exact thing with every other superhero film, really. Even the beloved Reeves 'Superman' made tweaks to the source material. The difference in success vs. crapola is in the way it's approached. It must: 1) treat the source material with dignity, 2) play it straight rather than going for cheap laughs, and 3) make the characters 'real' rather than 2-dimensional caricatures. If it can do all this in a way that can still appeal to non-CB fans then it should do well financially and critically, and please the less-hypercritical fanboys among us.

BTW... any time an existing non-comedic character (comics, TV, etc.) is played for laughs it should send up an instant 'red flag' that the folks involved either have no clue, or no respect... or both.

I honestly don't think that a 100% faithful adaption would EVER be well received by anyone other than CB junkies. There's just too much stuff to cram into a single picture or even series/trilogy. Unless you know it like the back of your hand, you're lost in seconds. Hardly a way to achieve box office success and ensure a long-running franchise. Like it or not, no matter how widespread we think we are, the fact of the matter is that non-CB fans make up the vast majority of the movie-going public, by a wide margin. If you can't adapt a CB hero and his/her backstory into something that anyone can follow and appreciate, you're sunk. You'll walk away with the most faithfully-adapted flop in history.

Take the FF movie Corman did in the early 90's. Folks who've seen it (not me) say it is much more faithful to the core concepts of the FF than the two recent adaptions, but I doubt it would have done well. (Although that would be more Corman's fault for trying to commit such an ambitious idea to film for $1.98 than for pure heart and good intentions.) And regarding 'X-Men,' despite what a lot of haters say, I think most audience members (non-CB fans) would have broke out in gales of laughter if Wolverine had stepped on screen in his traditional blue & yellow skintight costume and mask. What looks great on a bright, four-color comic panel often looks goofy on-screen.

There are exceptions of course. Reeves' Superman looked much better in his bright tights than the depressing maroon & Thalo blue suit Bryan Singer gave him. Same goes for Spidey. I think the suit tweaks looked okay, but weren't really needed. On the other hand, Ang's Hulk looked too green. Bright day-glo green looks nice in a comic and on Kermit the Frog, but not the Hulk. The LL version seems headed back in the right direction by adding gray to the green, and making it a darker hue.

The really sad / crazy thing about all this is that no one will be totally happy no matter what the film is like. Some will be ga-ga over it; others will decry it as celluloid diarrhea. The majority will probably like some parts and not others... and all of these impressions from watching the exact same movie!

Every fan has a perfect version of the movie in their head, and most likely everyone's 'brain film' will resemble very little of what we see next June, so there are bound to be haters & complaints. I fear I may become one of these, as the Hulk is my fav hero, and so I go in with high expectations and mental "must-haves" that probably won't see a frame of film, just like I did with Ghost Rider. As long as most of what's on screen jingles my bells, then I'll forgive the rest and like (or love) it. However, if I see more wrong than right then I'll be back here screaming to the Heavens.

I just hope I'll be crying tears of joy next summer rather than tears of sorrow.

You should post more often.

 

[He-Man]

The Ang movie didn't need more Hulk, it needed a better Hulk. Un-heroic, baby-faced, Stay-Puft Hulk just didn't cut it. Only a few brief moments during his total screen time in that entire film approached the true power that is The Incredible Hulk. And contrary to what you say, I believe too much Hulk is a bad thing. I don't want to just see the Hulk run around and smash crap for two hours. Overkill; familiarity breeds contempt; seen it, etc., etc. I can get that fix playing Hulk: Ultimate Destruction.

I think much of the delight in seeing the Hulk destroy things comes from the build up of the tension in and around Banner beforehand, leading up to that 'last straw' - when he loses control and the beast within him erupts like big green volcano. Don't get me wrong though. I can't wait to see the Hulk destroy some major sections of real estate and whoop some badguy ass, but too much is too much. Like a cake that's all icing and no cake.

I think your theory that sticking close = success is thin ice, at best. The first two 'X-Men' films were major box office smashes, yet Singer & Co. took HUGE liberties with practically all of the characters in various ways: origin, time-line placement, dress & uniform, etc. Same exact thing with every other superhero film, really. Even the beloved Reeves 'Superman' made tweaks to the source material. The difference in success vs. crapola is in the way it's approached. It must: 1) treat the source material with dignity, 2) play it straight rather than going for cheap laughs, and 3) make the characters 'real' rather than 2-dimensional caricatures. If it can do all this in a way that can still appeal to non-CB fans then it should do well financially and critically, and please the less-hypercritical fanboys among us.

BTW... any time an existing non-comedic character (comics, TV, etc.) is played for laughs it should send up an instant 'red flag' that the folks involved either have no clue, or no respect... or both.

I honestly don't think that a 100% faithful adaption would EVER be well received by anyone other than CB junkies. There's just too much stuff to cram into a single picture or even series/trilogy. Unless you know it like the back of your hand, you're lost in seconds. Hardly a way to achieve box office success and ensure a long-running franchise. Like it or not, no matter how widespread we think we are, the fact of the matter is that non-CB fans make up the vast majority of the movie-going public, by a wide margin. If you can't adapt a CB hero and his/her backstory into something that anyone can follow and appreciate, you're sunk. You'll walk away with the most faithfully-adapted flop in history.

Take the FF movie Corman did in the early 90's. Folks who've seen it (not me) say it is much more faithful to the core concepts of the FF than the two recent adaptions, but I doubt it would have done well. (Although that would be more Corman's fault for trying to commit such an ambitious idea to film for $1.98 than for pure heart and good intentions.) And regarding 'X-Men,' despite what a lot of haters say, I think most audience members (non-CB fans) would have broke out in gales of laughter if Wolverine had stepped on screen in his traditional blue & yellow skintight costume and mask. What looks great on a bright, four-color comic panel often looks goofy on-screen.

There are exceptions of course. Reeves' Superman looked much better in his bright tights than the depressing maroon & Thalo blue suit Bryan Singer gave him. Same goes for Spidey. I think the suit tweaks looked okay, but weren't really needed. On the other hand, Ang's Hulk looked too green. Bright day-glo green looks nice in a comic and on Kermit the Frog, but not the Hulk. The LL version seems headed back in the right direction by adding gray to the green, and making it a darker hue.

The really sad / crazy thing about all this is that no one will be totally happy no matter what the film is like. Some will be ga-ga over it; others will decry it as celluloid diarrhea. The majority will probably like some parts and not others... and all of these impressions from watching the exact same movie!

Every fan has a perfect version of the movie in their head, and most likely everyone's 'brain film' will resemble very little of what we see next June, so there are bound to be haters & complaints. I fear I may become one of these, as the Hulk is my fav hero, and so I go in with high expectations and mental "must-haves" that probably won't see a frame of film, just like I did with Ghost Rider. As long as most of what's on screen jingles my bells, then I'll forgive the rest and like (or love) it. However, if I see more wrong than right then I'll be back here screaming to the Heavens.

I just hope I'll be crying tears of joy next summer rather than tears of sorrow.

Good post. Couldn't have said it better.

 

[Obi-Ron]

Ang's Hulk looked too green.

I will never understand this statement.

 

[thejon7]

I mean, the evidence is building- with this new picture, the title, and the director saying that the original theme will be used, is this going to be just like the 80's show?

I hope not. I mean, it makes for a damn good movie, but there is a limit.

I personally like that they're basing certain senarios off of the original television series starring Lou Ferrigino and Bill Bixby. I personally wish that the Hulk in the film would be the average height and size of a regular man but enhanced so they could have a little less CGI helm the film but I'm alright with that as long as they get it right. I also hope the action sequences are a lot more enjoyable then the previously released Hulk film where you could barely tell what the hell was happening half the time. Anyhow, I'm sure that this is going to be a pretty good film but however, I can't confirm that yet because we haven't seen any footage released yet.

 

[El Payaso]

I also hope the action sequences are a lot more enjoyable then the previously released Hulk film where you could barely tell what the hell was happening half the time.

Were you watching Batman Begins instead?

 

[Dirty Harry]

I will never understand this statement.

I thought the green used was too light-tinted and waaay too bright. He often was a brighter & lighter shade of green than he was even in the comics. Almost fluorescent / day-glo in some scenes. Like in San Fran in that last rampage. He was so neon green in some shots it damn near burned my retinas.

I like the skin tone shown us in the pre-vis art of his head and the clearer full body shot we finally got a few days ago. Moss green rather than Kermit green.

BTW... I hope one TV show influence they DON'T use is the TV reunion movie's mullet hairdo!!!

"Rage in front, party in the back!"

 

[Dirty Harry]

Were you watching Batman Begins instead?

LOL. I think Bale was channeling Michael Bay in those fight sequences. Too much camera movement and way too damn close to the action. Locked down cameras all the time are visually bland, but when all of the characters in a shot are writhing around like a flock of panicked sheep it's too distracting to be so close to what's going on. That WTF-cam aspect turned me off of most of the fight stuff in 'BB' and 'Transformers.' And while I'm at it, enough already with the 'NYPD Blue' shaky-cam crap stuff, too. I shouldn't have to take Dramamine before going into a theater.

 

[DoctorJones]

I didn't have a problem with any of the cinematography in films like Batman Begins, Transformers or Hulk. I'm just blessed with good eyes then.

 

[Obi-Ron]

"Rage in front, party in the back!"

 

[co2]

 

[Dirty Harry]

My previous 'joke' comment got me to thinking. If Lou Ferrigno could have maintained the massive size and cut definition that he had in the first '89 reunion TV movie - and a short, dark green wig, he would've been damn close to spot on as far as comic book build. I mean no one has baseball mitt hands and mukluk-sized feet in proportion to the rest of their body, but Lou came closest to a "CB Hulk" build in that film. Too bad the rest of the film was so poopy.

I made a screen grab and tweaked it just for the helluvit, to give Lou a more CB look (purple pants & hair). Hmmmm.. We could've had this for the whole series:.

 

[The Hulk]

My previous 'joke' comment got me to thinking. If Lou Ferrigno could have maintained the massive size and cut definition that he had in the first '89 reunion TV movie - and a short, dark green wig, he would've been damn close to spot on as far as comic book build. I mean no one has baseball mitt hands and mukluk-sized feet in proportion to the rest of their body, but Lou came closest to a "CB Hulk" build in that film. Too bad the rest of the film was so poopy.

I made a screen grab and tweaked it just for the helluvit, to give Lou a more CB look (purple pants & hair). Hmmmm.. We could've had this for the whole series:.

while that looks ok, it just shows that a human cant play hulk. nor could a guy in a suit. cgi is the only was to capture comic book hulk. i wish the thing had of been cgi instead of a guyin a suit. that hurt ff4 so much imho.

 

[co2]

I agree. CGI is really the only way to fully realise the Hulk as he is depicted in the comics.
You do have to admit, at the time of the TV show, Lou was the absolute ONLY person to play the Hulk..and I can't imagine anyone other than Bixby for Banner. Sure the story was tweaked quite a bit to allow it to fit the small screen format properly, but with the combination of the best possible casting, and the serious tone..even good music..it was really the best way to bring the Hulk to life at the time.
Everyone know that Nov 4th of this past year was the 30th anniversary of the pilot premiering on CBS? I was 5 years old, but I definitely remember watching it that night.

 

[Doc Samson]

To a certain extent, it has to be a little more like the TV show just because for some people, thats all they know. If they want this film to be a success, it would be wise to include ELEMENTS from the show, but not going too overboard with it

 

[Dirty Harry]

To a certain extent, it has to be a little more like the TV show just because for some people, thats all they know. If they want this film to be a success, it would be wise to include ELEMENTS from the show, but not going too overboard with it

Exactly! It is in their best interests for the film makers to try and acknowledge & satisfy fans of the varied incarnations of the Hulk. The recipe for TIH success:

1a) The best of the 616 comic (classic, most widely-recognized appearance & powers, rogue's gallery of best villains & supporting cast, over-the-top level of action)

1b) Throw a bone to the fans of the newer 'Ultimate' version with the inclusion of the Super serum story angle

2) The best of the live-action TV series (Bixby's outstanding adult-oriented pathos-drenched Banner performance, iconic music cues & visual tidbits)

= perfect 'movie Hulk' that appeals to all fan sectors and brings in and satisfies each (at least to some degree)

I simply cannot understand why people are not happy that at least some (if not all) of the particular version of the Hulk that they know & love is being incorporated into this re-boot. You'd think this approach is a "no-brainer" if we want the Hulk to be good enough (and make enough of a profit) to keep the franchise going strong. Must be one of those "there's no pleasing some people" kind of things, I guess?

 

[Doc Samson]

Exactly! It is in their best interests for the film makers to try and acknowledge & satisfy fans of the varied incarnations of the Hulk. The recipe for TIH success:

1a) The best of the 616 comic (classic, most widely-recognized appearance & powers, rogue's gallery of best villains & supporting cast, over-the-top level of action)

1b) Throw a bone to the fans of the newer 'Ultimate' version with the inclusion of the Super serum story angle

2) The best of the live-action TV series (Bixby's outstanding adult-oriented pathos-drenched Banner performance, iconic music cues & visual tidbits)

= perfect 'movie Hulk' that appeals to all fan sectors and brings in and satisfies each (at least to some degree)

I simply cannot understand why people are not happy that at least some (if not all) of the particular version of the Hulk that they know & love is being incorporated into this re-boot. You'd think this approach is a "no-brainer" if we want the Hulk to be good enough (and make enough of a profit) to keep the franchise going strong. Must be one of those "there's no pleasing some people" kind of things, I guess?

And you'd be guessing right, it's just in some people's nature to object to SOMETHING. Personally, while not a huge TV show fan, I loved the Banner elements and the music. Including these will do nothing but help the film at the box office. And if we want another movie in a few years, I think we should be open to some of those inclusions...

 

[Norm3]

1b) Throw a bone to the fans of the newer 'Ultimate' version with the inclusion of the Super serum story angle

How about throwing a bone to the original content of the Comic Book series by having the original CB origin. Or something close to it, Rick Jones anyone? The one dangerous Gamma bomb would do wonders for the Hulk movie universe. The gamma bomb could effect people differently & most others not at all. This could then be used for other gamma people/creatures in future films. Hollywood can't seem to figure this out. I guess the Leader will be creating all of Hulks villains from now on or by stealing from Banner.

 

[Doc Samson]

How about throwing a bone to the original content of the Comic Book series by having the original CB origin. Or something close to it, Rick Jones anyone? The one dangerous Gamma bomb would do wonders for the Hulk movie universe. The gamma bomb could effect people differently & most others not at all. This could then be used for other gamma people/creatures in future films. Hollywood can't seem to figure this out. I guess the Leader will be creating all of Hulks villains from now on or by stealing from Banner.

I also think a Gamma Bomb would work, but going by that one picture where Norton is sitting in the same machine Bixby was, it's hard to tell which way they're gonna go with the origin. The bomb, at least in some form, should be included. Or at least somebody with the name Rick Jones at least...