Q & A w/Louis Leterrier: Round 2

[Bannerless Hulk]

Hee hee...well...sure.

I would like to have a few things in the open. You'll notice I have a built in "out" in my statement.

another Hulk with no personality will bomb at the box office.

So I could, if needed, claim that a successful Hulk film did indeed feature a lead character with a personality.

Ha... the built-in "out." Very clever. But I could see the problems with its definitions or assumptions, if you will, and that's why I didn't explore it further. One must agree that he had no personality and that's a road I'm not going to venture down, I reason.

There is also the problem of defining exactly what "bombing" is. Does the film need to make more than the first movie? Since the first one was considered a disappointment, that sounds fair. But how much more?

Or it could just boil down to it making enough money to warrant a sequel. What do you think?

I am saying I doubt they can do that with a mute Hulk though. It's possible the next Batman movie could be successful and feature a mute Batman with a personality, but that sure makes it harder to do.

Hate to allow money to serve as a "be all, end all" determinant, but if in fact TIH so bombs as critics think (and perhaps hope) it will, then yeah, in about 20 years, I suppose they should come out with an all-new Hulk in which he fully engages in conversation. Otherwise, I just don't see how we can point to Hulk's box office performance and target his ability to articulate (and, hence, his personality or our ability to connect with it) as being a main reason people did not show up in droves to see the movie. It's analogous to pointing to his skin color as being a principal reason why it failed at the box office. You can't prove or conclude anything, unless you do some kind of longitudinal, qualitative analysis of viewers IMO.

The whole first person vs. third person argument that lately has come up? I'm not sure that really matters. The way I see it is he's more a monster than a human being and a monster speaking intelligible words will always carry the quality of being a bit hokey IMO. More for kids and less grounded in reality. I mean, there are those of us who like to believe such things can happen, and whether the Hulk talked in the comics or not, I think fleshing that out in a feature-length film is risky. Certainly would love to see him with more personality, but if the directors and producers say no, then I reason it's not my job to insult their intelligence and say they should or that they're wrong for not.

The painful thing for me is again....one of the most interesting characters in all of comics has never been created onscreen. He, unlike his contemporaries, must be mute? Why...because he's green? CGI? That never hampered Yoda or Gollum...and they've both become cinematic icons.
The mute Hulk...not so much. He's mostly considered a punch-line. (Which enrages me....blood boiling....temper flaring....losing control...) I hate that my favorite comic character is snickered at. Mostly because so few know what he's really like. And Hollywood doesn't have the guts to put him up there and at least give him a chance.

Well, there are reasons people didn't like the first movie, but I insist it didn't have as much to do with him not talking as it had to do with just a very dry script. Did you notice it had almost no humor? Humor! There was nothing for us to laugh at, and for an action movie, this is unacceptable (Readers take note: Like it or hate it, Transformers had LOTS of humor and the movie rocked the box office. That's for those of you who think the box office means anything or everything.) Instead, Ang gave us a lot of angst (no pun intended) and that, to me, is what crushed the movie for those who were crushed by it. But "snickers"?? Can't say I heard any of those and if I did, I would've ignored them.

Hollywood... see, now this raises a slew of issues. Do you want a Hulk that is true to the comics and perhaps fails at the box office (even if he talks) or do you want what Hollywood thinks will make amends for the first Hulk's "failure"? I trust they're doing what they think is right, but you clearly do not... and this gets back to issues I've been discussing with wobbly, namely a lack of faith and/or patronage to the Hulk himself because he's not characterized the way we want. Which, to me, is just sour grapes. Enjoy/appreciate the Hulk for what/who he is. Find some aspect you like and cling to it. Leave the rest to your imagination. Any of these options is better than whining!

 

[wobbly]

BH, thanks for clarifying your earlier post and I'm willing to accept I treated it more harshly than it really merited. If you in turn was offended by my reaction I apologise unreservedly.

Rather than go over your post point by point, which would just involve repetition of thoughts already spoken in this thread in any case, I will respond to the last:

I can accept/appreciate all of that and thank you. Again, sorry if you felt called a liar and/or mocked. It's just my style that perhaps you misunderstood. I mean, these issues have eternal consequences, don't you agree? We HAVE to get them sorted out NOW...

Agreed

 

[Bannerless Hulk]

Works for me.

 

[TBadora]

Seeing you two work out your differences really brought a tear to my eye. Golf claps t:

 

[JeetKuneDo]

Hate to allow money to serve as a "be all, end all" determinant, but if in fact TIH so bombs as critics think (and perhaps hope) it will, then yeah, in about 20 years, I suppose they should come out with an all-new Hulk in which he fully engages in conversation. Otherwise, I just don't see how we can point to Hulk's box office performance and target his ability to articulate (and, hence, his personality or our ability to connect with it) as being a main reason people did not show up in droves to see the movie. It's analogous to pointing to his skin color as being a principal reason why it failed at the box office. You can't prove or conclude anything, unless you do some kind of longitudinal, qualitative analysis of viewers IMO.

Yeah...there are a multitude of reasons a movie fails. The reasons I heard for the last one were, boring and bad CGI. I agree with the boring bit, but I blame the "bad CGI" on the lack of Hulk speaking. I think he was every bit as well rendered as Gollum....who was praised as "well done CGI". But Gollum had a personality that didn't leave the audience with nothing to do except notice he was a special effect.

The whole first person vs. third person argument that lately has come up? I'm not sure that really matters. The way I see it is he's more a monster than a human being and a monster speaking intelligible words will always carry the quality of being a bit hokey IMO. More for kids and less grounded in reality. I mean, there are those of us who like to believe such things can happen, and whether the Hulk talked in the comics or not, I think fleshing that out in a feature-length film is risky. Certainly would love to see him with more personality, but if the directors and producers say no, then I reason it's not my job to insult their intelligence and say they should or that they're wrong for not.

That's my job!

I think making any movie like this is risky anyway. But the Hulk in the comic is an interesting guy. There is nothing boring about him. I would like to see him onscreen once before I die and give him a chance to been seen by the world. He's a great character. Much more than some run-of-the-mill "monster". It's up to some talented filmmaker to bring him to life. (Peter Jackson level talent....who also accomplished the "impossible to bring to a movie screen".)

Hollywood... see, now this raises a slew of issues. Do you want a Hulk that is true to the comics and perhaps fails at the box office (even if he talks) or do you want what Hollywood thinks will make amends for the first Hulk's "failure"? I trust they're doing what they think is right, but you clearly do not... and this gets back to issues I've been discussing with wobbly, namely a lack of faith and/or patronage to the Hulk himself because he's not characterized the way we want. Which, to me, is just sour grapes. Enjoy/appreciate the Hulk for what/who he is. Find some aspect you like and cling to it. Leave the rest to your imagination. Any of these options is better than whining!

I do not trust Hollywood. That is a fact. They are responsible for both the TV show and the first movie. The Hulk didn't appear in either one. (The movie was MUCH closer at least.) Clearly they are afraid of the character. I don't know why they bother.

If they are making amends for the first one, making him a mute is a poor first step. Again he'll just be a special effect shot that smashes things and stares at the other characters. yay..

I cannot imagine a Hulk from the comics failing. He's just too cool to not draw people in. If someone in Hollywood would just make a movie about him and let Banner be the "special guest" for once... (They'll never do it...) Having Smegle in Return of the King was cool and all...but Gollum is the star of that little show. He's the interesting one.

When it's not the Hulk there really isn't much to appreciate. I can get the same thing from watching King Kong.

 

[Cracker Jack]

But the Hulk in the comic is an interesting guy. There is nothing boring about him. I would like to see him onscreen once before I die and give him a chance to been seen by the world. He's a great character. Much more than some run-of-the-mill "monster".


Again he'll just be a special effect shot that smashes things and stares at the other characters. yay..


When it's not the Hulk there really isn't much to appreciate. I can get the same thing from watching King Kong.

Wow! Wow! Wow!

Are you inside my head or something? My exact feelings.

 

[afan]

Muting the Hulk character is a choice on the part of the filmmaker, muting King Kong is not a choice, it's the nature of the beast, gorilla's don't speak. There simply is no comparative quality here to discuss.

Hulk is a human character, a human inceredibly transfomed by nearly impossible circumstances, but still a human, and human's speak. It is how we communicate, it is what we expect.

Hulk's world considers him to be a monster, if he walks like a duck and talks like a duck he must be a duck. The theater audience must see him differently they must recognize that he is not what he appears to be, they must sympathize with his plight. We must know his thoughts, he must be more than his massive green visage. Muting the Hulk severely handicaps the potential for that connection with the character.

Sound FX is a crucial element of filmmaking, it can be so identifiable as to become iconic. Creating a unique voice for the Hulk would only enhance the character. Consider the voices of these fantastic creations........
Darth Vader
ET
HAL 2000
Yoda
Homer Simpson.
Each of these characters are greatly enhanced by the "sound" of their voices, not just what they said, but the tone of their voices alone lent amazing dramatic effectiveness to their characters. Why then should the Hulk not be given that same advantage?

Now all that being said it is surely possible to present a nonspeaking Hulk and still illicit sympathy from an audience, silent films succeeded for decades at this, however the advent of the talkie only increased the power of films.

So put me squarely in the corner that desires a speaking Hulk, while questioning the filmmakers decision to mute the character.

 

[Cracker Jack]

I'm not going to say this movie will fail because the Hulk doesn't talk. I'm saying it's headed down the same path as Ang's movie because they are not letting the character be the character. They just don't think that a character that was "worked" for 40+ years in the comics will work on screen unless they change him, once again. I don't think they get it.

 

[JeetKuneDo]

Muting the Hulk character is a choice on the part of the filmmaker, muting King Kong is not a choice, it's the nature of the beast, gorilla's don't speak. There simply is no comparative quality here to discuss.

Hulk is a human character, a human inceredibly transfomed by nearly impossible circumstances, but still a human, and human's speak. It is how we communicate, it is what we expect.

Hulk's world considers him to be a monster, if he walks like a duck and talks like a duck he must be a duck. The theater audience must see him differently they must recognize that he is not what he appears to be, they must sympathize with his plight. We must know his thoughts, he must be more than his massive green visage. Muting the Hulk severely handicaps the potential for that connection with the character.

Sound FX is a crucial element of filmmaking, it can be so identifiable as to become iconic. Creating a unique voice for the Hulk would only enhance the character. Consider the voices of these fantastic creations........
Darth Vader
ET
HAL 2000
Yoda
Homer Simpson.
Each of these characters are greatly enhanced by the "sound" of their voices, not just what they said, but the tone of their voices alone lent amazing dramatic effectiveness to their characters. Why then should the Hulk not be given that same advantage?

Now all that being said it is surely possible to present a nonspeaking Hulk and still illicit sympathy from an audience, silent films succeeded for decades at this, however the advent of the talkie only increased the power of films.

So put me squarely in the corner that desires a speaking Hulk, while questioning the filmmakers decision to mute the character.

(applause) Agree on King Kong. Kong is not a talking character, the Hulk is. Muting him is just like muting any other talking character you can name.

I'm not going to say this movie will fail because the Hulk doesn't talk. I'm saying it's headed down the same path as Ang's movie because they are not letting the character be the character. They just don't think that a character that was "worked" for 40+ years in the comics will work on screen unless they change him, once again. I don't think they get it.

And all this...without ever trying it once onscreen. Lord of the Rings fans will recall that it was "common wisdom" for years that it could not work onscreen. Peter Jackson was not afraid to do it...and do it right.

 

[Bannerless Hulk]

Muting the Hulk character is a choice on the part of the filmmaker, muting King Kong is not a choice, it's the nature of the beast, gorilla's don't speak. There simply is no comparative quality here to discuss.

Hulk is a human character, a human inceredibly transfomed by nearly impossible circumstances, but still a human, and human's speak. It is how we communicate, it is what we expect.

Hulk's world considers him to be a monster, if he walks like a duck and talks like a duck he must be a duck. The theater audience must see him differently they must recognize that he is not what he appears to be, they must sympathize with his plight. We must know his thoughts, he must be more than his massive green visage. Muting the Hulk severely handicaps the potential for that connection with the character.

Sound FX is a crucial element of filmmaking, it can be so identifiable as to become iconic. Creating a unique voice for the Hulk would only enhance the character. Consider the voices of these fantastic creations........
Darth Vader
ET
HAL 2000
Yoda
Homer Simpson.
Each of these characters are greatly enhanced by the "sound" of their voices, not just what they said, but the tone of their voices alone lent amazing dramatic effectiveness to their characters. Why then should the Hulk not be given that same advantage?

Now all that being said it is surely possible to present a nonspeaking Hulk and still illicit sympathy from an audience, silent films succeeded for decades at this, however the advent of the talkie only increased the power of films.

So put me squarely in the corner that desires a speaking Hulk, while questioning the filmmakers decision to mute the character.

Nice post. The middle, bolded part resonates with me particularly. That would be cool if the Hulk had his own distinct voice such as those in your list, I reason. When you said Darth Vader, I knew instantly what you meant. For the record, I hated the early Star Wars movies... I lose interest every time I try to watch them... but Vader's voice was always cool, I thought. Iconic, as you say.

And for the record, I hear what y'all are saying, but to stroke the embers one more time, why can't the Hulk simply be known as the film character who doesn't talk? Why must we know his thoughts? Isn't there something to be said about the mystery that surrounds him, namely that we DON'T know the Hulk's thoughts? To what advantage is it to take away that mystery? And going back to a point I made earlier, why is it that he must speak words? Can't he do his talking through his smashing and other nonverbals, while Banner provides the context for it all?

I dunno. I'm just trying to come up with some good reasons why the filmmakers are evidently against it. I mean, what happens if TIH does well at the box office - you know, he's perceived as "cool" even without talking much? Seems those of you who are so adamant about him talking then become the minority - are you going to be happy about the movie or are you gonna wallow in self-pity?

 

[Cracker Jack]

Having read the draft I agree with Sarge that there isn’t really any call for him , in the draft, to talk except in one scene. He does say Betty at the end of the movie so he’s not a mute. He can talk. I don’t think anyone is saying he should be a blabber mouth. However, what he’s thinking is significant. If he does not relay his thoughts then he becomes mindless. Just another monster without a personality. Like I said, I will wait and see but at the same time I have a bad feeling about this. What get’s me is everyone saying that it will look stupid. Really? And you know this how? Would it be to much for the Hulk to grab a soldier, a tough or Abomy and say “Punny Human.”? or “Leave Hulk alone or Hulk will Smash!”? Even after he kicks Abomy’s ass he could say “BAH! Hulk told you he’s the strongest one there is!”. It is possible. It could work. It hasn’t been tried. I think people want to hear the Hulk speak.

 

[jadejaws]

Having read the draft I agree with Sarge that there isn’t really any call for him , in the draft, to talk except in one scene. He does say Betty at the end of the movie so he’s not a mute. He can talk. I don’t think anyone is saying he should be a blabber mouth. However, what he’s thinking is significant. If he does not relay his thoughts then he becomes mindless. Just another monster without a personality. Like I said, I will wait and see but at the same time I have a bad feeling about this. What get’s me is everyone saying that it will look stupid. Really? And you know this how? Would it be to much for the Hulk to grab a soldier, a tough or Abomy and say “Punny Human.”? or “Leave Hulk alone or Hulk will Smash!”? Even after he kicks Abomy’s ass he could say “BAH! Hulk told you he’s the strongest one there is!”. It is possible. It could work. It hasn’t been tried. I think people want to hear the Hulk speak.

I agree with CJ on this 100%. If it was done correctly it could work.

 

[Advanced Dark]

http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=12989563&postcount=30

 

[Sarg92]

Having read the draft I agree with Sarge that there isn’t really any call for him , in the draft, to talk except in one scene.

Yup. I don't think Hulk needs to talk whilst fighting. He probably only needs to speak is when he is with Betty, that's it. A calmed down Hulk could tell Betty how he is feeling rather than an angry Hulk that would just roar and shout!

But I am sure that they will have Hulk talking more in the sequel and in first person. I'm sure Hulk will be learning how to talk in this movie if rewrites have been done in that area, Hulk learning to talk will show his child-like mind.

 

[HulkStomps!]

Nice post. The middle, bolded part resonates with me particularly. That would be cool if the Hulk had his own distinct voice such as those in your list, I reason. When you said Darth Vader, I knew instantly what you meant. For the record, I hated the early Star Wars movies... I lose interest every time I try to watch them... but Vader's voice was always cool, I thought. Iconic, as you say.

And for the record, I hear what y'all are saying, but to stroke the embers one more time, why can't the Hulk simply be known as the film character who doesn't talk? Why must we know his thoughts? Isn't there something to be said about the mystery that surrounds him, namely that we DON'T know the Hulk's thoughts? To what advantage is it to take away that mystery? And going back to a point I made earlier, why is it that he must speak words? Can't he do his talking through his smashing and other nonverbals, while Banner provides the context for it all?

I dunno. I'm just trying to come up with some good reasons why the filmmakers are evidently against it. I mean, what happens if TIH does well at the box office - you know, he's perceived as "cool" even without talking much? Seems those of you who are so adamant about him talking then become the minority - are you going to be happy about the movie or are you gonna wallow in self-pity?

LOL! Well speaking for myself, bottom line I want this movie to be considered THE BEST marvel movie ever long after box office tally. So I would never wallow in self pity over it's success, It's just that I think since Hulk "talking" was the first way he was ever introduced as a character, that he should get the chance to be presented to all the non-comic book readers, who first learned of Hulk through the live action TV show.

Personally I believe that when the movie succeeds, then I fear that it will be harder than ever for the newer Hulk fan generation to except, or be open to the idea of Hulk, or even the Abomination talking.

 

[Cracker Jack]

http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=12989563&postcount=30

What has that got to do with anything?

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

TO be honedt the Hulk not talking doesnt bother me THAT much, in Ang's movie, i could always tell what he was feeling through his facial expressions.

Its just practically most other thing about the movie i have a problem with, like Hulk killing people.

 

[JeetKuneDo]

Does the Abomination talk?

Using the logic behind a mute Hulk, he shouldn't talk either. That should be interesting to have two major characters that have no thoughts worthy of presenting to the audience.

 

[Advanced Dark]

Does the Abomination talk?

Using the logic behind a mute Hulk, he shouldn't talk either. That should be interesting to have two major characters that have no thoughts worthy of presenting to the audience.

Hmmmm. That's ironic because now we have 3.

 

[afan]

Nice post back at ya BannerlessHulk. Now we're talkin'.

And for the record, I hear what y'all are saying, but to stroke the embers one more time, why can't the Hulk simply be known as the film character who doesn't talk? Why must we know his thoughts? Isn't there something to be said about the mystery that surrounds him, namely that we DON'T know the Hulk's thoughts? To what advantage is it to take away that mystery? And going back to a point I made earlier, why is it that he must speak words? Can't he do his talking through his smashing and other nonverbals, while Banner provides the context for it all?

The way I see it.......

The Hulk story can be told two ways:
Somewhat in the mold of The Wolfman, or any of the werewolf incarnations. A story in which Bruce Banner becomes a savage monster.

Instead of the bite of a werewolf it is the gamma exposure that gives birth to the transformation, the rush of anger substituting the full moon as the catalyst for the metamorphosis. Banner is aware of his curse and is tormented by the horror his alter ego is guilty of, and yet despite his best efforts, he is powerless to stop it.

The Hulk is a mindless and savage creature of destruction. He is akin to a force of nature, a hurricane, an earthquake, or tornado, wreaking havok with no prejudice or conscience for it's destructive wrath.

or......

Banner and Hulk are split personalities.
The Hulk already existed in Banner just as it exists in all of us. We all momentarily Hulk out, anger is part of the human psyche, however in Banner's case the gamma radiation exposure is the catalyst to release the Hulk as a seperate personality, while cooly granting him incredible physical strength.

They each are aware of the other's existance, Banner being the rational personna recognizes that he is The Hulk. The Hulk who is the primitive considers Banner to be a seperate person.

Banner's moral fiber is also present within the Hulk. Just as those of us who are on an even keel, are capable of restraint in moments of anger, guided even in instances of rage by or ethics, the Hulk is also influenced by Banner's make-up. His destruction is not soullessly indiscriminate, he is mindfull of his power and is capable of restraint where applicable.

Both of these methods to tell the tale could and should include balls to the wall action.

The werewolf syle Hulk film can certainly be successfully done. Film history proves that with a proliferation of quality efforts based on the premise, however (IMO and only IMO) it is limited in it's potential for The Incredible Hulk, and any subsequent films.

For my money the second offers in addition to the action, the most potential for storytelling. It offers two characters to explore, characters that tho identical are divergent.

Clearly a speaking Hulk is not necessary with the first, but is crucial to the second, hence my preference for a speaking Hulk charcter.

 

[Cracker Jack]

Banner and Hulk are split personalities.
The Hulk already existed in Banner just as it exists in all of us. We all momentarily Hulk out, anger is part of the human psyche, however in Banner's case the gamma radiation exposure is the catalyst to release the Hulk as a seperate personality, while cooly granting him incredible physical strength.

They each are aware of the other's existance, Banner being the rational personna recognizes that he is The Hulk. The Hulk who is the primitive considers Banner to be a seperate person.

Banner's moral fiber is also present within the Hulk. Just as those of us who are on an even keel, are capable of restraint in moments of anger, guided even in instances of rage by or ethics, the Hulk is also influenced by Banner's make-up. His destruction is not soullessly indiscriminate, he is mindfull of his power and is capable of restraint where applicable.

Send this to Frenchy, It may not be to late for them to open their eyes and see the potential this film has if done correctely.

Good post Afan

 

[Sarg92]

Send this to Frenchy, It may not be to late for them to open their eyes and see the potential this film has if done correctely.

Good post Afan

But don't they have Banner and Hulk as seperate people in this film? Judging by the first draft of the script they do.

 

[Cracker Jack]

But don't they have Banner and Hulk as seperate people in this film? Judging by the first draft of the script they do.

Not really.

 

[Bannerless Hulk]

Nice post back at ya BannerlessHulk. Now we're talkin'.

Now if we can just get the Hulk to talk...

Banner and Hulk are split personalities.
The Hulk already existed in Banner just as it exists in all of us. We all momentarily Hulk out, anger is part of the human psyche, however in Banner's case the gamma radiation exposure is the catalyst to release the Hulk as a seperate personality, while cooly granting him incredible physical strength.

They each are aware of the other's existance, Banner being the rational personna recognizes that he is The Hulk. The Hulk who is the primitive considers Banner to be a seperate person.

Banner's moral fiber is also present within the Hulk. Just as those of us who are on an even keel, are capable of restraint in moments of anger, guided even in instances of rage by or ethics, the Hulk is also influenced by Banner's make-up. His destruction is not soullessly indiscriminate, he is mindfull of his power and is capable of restraint where applicable.

...

Clearly a speaking Hulk is not necessary with the first, but is crucial to the second, hence my preference for a speaking Hulk charcter.

Again, nice post. I like what you're saying, but I still don't see where, in either scenario, is the particular evidence or proof that a speaking Hulk is "crucial" or necessary. In the second scenario above (the one most of us probably favor), the fact that they're split personalities seems to argue just the opposite - that they can be entirely different entities. One talks; the other doesn't. There's nothing that screams both must talk, using words. I don't think we're going to get the wolfman version, so I've quoted only the split personality version for the sake of discussion from here on out.

Having read the draft I agree with Sarge that there isn’t really any call for him , in the draft, to talk except in one scene. He does say Betty at the end of the movie so he’s not a mute. He can talk. I don’t think anyone is saying he should be a blabber mouth. However, what he’s thinking is significant. If he does not relay his thoughts then he becomes mindless. Just another monster without a personality. Like I said, I will wait and see but at the same time I have a bad feeling about this. What get’s me is everyone saying that it will look stupid. Really? And you know this how? Would it be to much for the Hulk to grab a soldier, a tough or Abomy and say “Punny Human.”? or “Leave Hulk alone or Hulk will Smash!”? Even after he kicks Abomy’s ass he could say “BAH! Hulk told you he’s the strongest one there is!”. It is possible. It could work. It hasn’t been tried. I think people want to hear the Hulk speak.

CJ, I guess I don't agree. People like Sava and I felt the Hulk did convey his thoughts in the first movie; it was just unconventional to have him nonspeaking in doing so. But clearly, one could read his facial expressions, his demeanor around different groups of people, and the destruction he was causing... and if you accept that he conveyed his thoughts this way, then you can accept that he was not "mindless" or lacking personality. It's just that people want more personality for TIH, it seems, or the personality they're used to seeing in the comics.

I agree it could be really fun to have some lines interspersed in fights with Abomb, though. They would have to be well placed and the drama/tension would have to be at a climax, I think. If, for example, in the last battle after the Hulk has been down for a while, the audience senses there is a shift in momentum, I think the crowd would go ballistic if the Hulk belted out a few lines. It would be icing on the cake to what hopefully is already a spectacular battle scene.

http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=12989563&postcount=30

LOL It should never be like that. Love the MySpace reference, though.

Yup. I don't think Hulk needs to talk whilst fighting. He probably only needs to speak is when he is with Betty, that's it. A calmed down Hulk could tell Betty how he is feeling rather than an angry Hulk that would just roar and shout!

I think that's the only time, if any, he should talk.

LOL! Well speaking for myself, bottom line I want this movie to be considered THE BEST marvel movie ever long after box office tally. So I would never wallow in self pity over it's success, It's just that I think since Hulk "talking" was the first way he was ever introduced as a character, that he should get the chance to be presented to all the non-comic book readers, who first learned of Hulk through the live action TV show.

Personally I believe that when the movie succeeds, then I fear that it will be harder than ever for the newer Hulk fan generation to except, or be open to the idea of Hulk, or even the Abomination talking.

Does the Abomination talk?

Using the logic behind a mute Hulk, he shouldn't talk either. That should be interesting to have two major characters that have no thoughts worthy of presenting to the audience.

That would look pretty dumb, wouldn't it.

 

[Sarg92]

Not really.

We know Banner hates Hulk in the script. He says he cannot contol Hulk and wants to get rid of Hulk. And in a conversation with Betty, Banner says that when he becomes Hulk it is not him.

If Hulk talked then he could say how he feels and show his hate for Banner.