So I have this hypothesis...

[Ronny Shade]

doing some initial testing. I got this inkling that maybe the same people that hate Superman Returns hate Hulk and vice verse. Cast your vote, mortals, and we shall see.

 

[Cyrusbales]

I think they're both ok, SR is growing on me, wheras hulk is kinda doing the oposite, both film have bad bits, but SR is better, even though hulk has jennifer connellly

 

[Bat Attack]

Liked SR, not Hulk

 

[CConn]

I loved SR, and think Hulk's pretty mediocre.

 

[Chris Wallace]

I loved Hulk, haven't seen SR. What puzzles me is that many of the same people who rip on Hulk for all of its introspection & philosophy, praise Batman Begins for the same.

 

[Dr. Fate]

In the end, I enjoyed the Hulk more than the crap that is Superman Returns. And the Hulk wasn't that good to start with.

 

[Ronny Shade]

Looks like my hypothesis was off-base. Time will tell for sure.

 

[CConn]

I loved Hulk, haven't seen SR. What puzzles me is that many of the same people who rip on Hulk for all of its introspection & philosophy, praise Batman Begins for the same.

It because of how each film presented that introspective and philosophy. BB did it while keeping the film at a relatively fast pace with both plot and action. Hulk, simply put, didn't.

 

[Isildur´s Heir]

I love Hulk, which is, IMO, the best comic book out there.
Superman Retuns is an ok movie, horrible vision on the character, to make a sequel of an outdated franchise was a pathetic idea, but, as a movie, as an Elseworld type of deal, it was ok, with some good ideas.

 

[Chris Wallace]

It because of how each film presented that introspective and philosophy. BB did it while keeping the film at a relatively fast pace with both plot and action. Hulk, simply put, didn't.

I can live with that. That was the most objective criticism of this movie I've ever come across.

 

[co2]

I liked both to varying degrees but I liked Hulk a bit more. In terms of originality, Hulk definitely was superior where as SR I didn't feel added anything new to the character. But both I would say were at least enjoyable.

 

[SuperFerret]

Hulk gets better with each watching, whilst Superman Returns seemed like an incomplete movie to me. It was nearly three hours without much action or dialogue or story. Hulk has it's flaws, but it's not a "Seinfeld" movie.

 

[Ronny Shade]

It because of how each film presented that introspective and philosophy. BB did it while keeping the film at a relatively fast pace with both plot and action. Hulk, simply put, didn't.

Some people don't like slow pacing. Personally, I love slow pacing. Fast isn't always good.

 

[PWN3R]

I have a love/hate relationship with Hulk. Its brilliant yet the worst comic book movie yet IMO. SR was decent, I really liked it at first, but 2nd viewing really changed my opinion.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Well, with both movies, i enjoyed them a hell of a lot more on subsequent viewings the first, say, 7 times i saw them. I still love Hulk now, and in 3 years i still think i will love SR. So i like them both almost equally, with the Hulk just shading it.

 

[Chris Wallace]

Hulk gets better with each watching, whilst Superman Returns seemed like an incomplete movie to me. It was nearly three hours without much action or dialogue or story. Hulk has it's flaws, but it's not a "Seinfeld" movie.

That's a pretty harsh comparison. Oh, you mean "a movie about nothing".

 

[Chris Wallace]

Some people don't like slow pacing. Personally, I love slow pacing. Fast isn't always good.

To me it's not about slow vs. fast, but where it takes us. Some argued that the first Spider-man & X-Men movies were too slow-paced. Hulk was just slower than people expected it to be, iMO.

 

[Max J Power]

liked SR, not Hulk

 

[matrix_ghost]

I liked 'em both . They're still hovering around the below average mark for me though.

As what you asked Chris about the Hulk , i can sorta give you an explanation.
If you you've got a two paintings , one modern abstract art and a beautiful painting of a landscape.
Both are essentially paintings but i bet a vast majority of people would instantly fall in love with the painting of the landscape and scratch their heads pondering what the abstract art painting stands for.

It's the same with Hulk and Batman Begins. While both movies try to flesh out the characters in the movie , Hulk just gives off that artsy vibe whereas Batman Begins is like the landscape painting : You understand what is presented , how it is presented and why it is presented in such a way.
With Hulk you're wondering what the heck all those molecules and other stuff is in the movie.
The fact also that Batman Begins has a tighter pace means that there is no lingering time.

In the end it all comes down to one thing : "Has the audience gotten their money's worth".
With Batman definately. With Hulk no. People want Hulk to do some serious carnage.
Everytime i show Batman Begins to friends and relatives they really do like the movie.

 

[co2]

Great.....but the question was Hulk compared to Superman Returns not Batman Begins

 

[blind_fury]

Both were terribly disappointing.

Singer and Ang Lee should read more comic books.

 

[The Kid]

Hulk, while a little overly serious at times (and yes the mutli-screen thing was a tad confusing), is to me one of the better comic book movies. I never really understood why it was so hated. I think it actually stomps all over everything in begins and I don't think it's too complicated to understand it. It presents bruce as this very introverted man who's father's sin caused him to become a monster... come on.

Returns I will say has some nice fx here and ther but in the end it really doesn't seem to have its own identity. It's just that rehash of stm with the super kid in it who throws pianos.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I have never understood the hate for both movies, especially Hulk, from the first time i saw it i loved it, and still watch it today. Its not hard to understand, but it is definately a movie that needs to be seen 3/4 times to take everything in. A lot of people on these boards who disliked it re-watched it recently with the new movie coming soon, and a lot found that they actually liked it a lot on second viewing.

 

[Chris Wallace]

I liked 'em both . They're still hovering around the below average mark for me though.

As what you asked Chris about the Hulk , i can sorta give you an explanation.
If you you've got a two paintings , one modern abstract art and a beautiful painting of a landscape.
Both are essentially paintings but i bet a vast majority of people would instantly fall in love with the painting of the landscape and scratch their heads pondering what the abstract art painting stands for.

It's the same with Hulk and Batman Begins. While both movies try to flesh out the characters in the movie , Hulk just gives off that artsy vibe whereas Batman Begins is like the landscape painting : You understand what is presented , how it is presented and why it is presented in such a way.
With Hulk you're wondering what the heck all those molecules and other stuff is in the movie.
The fact also that Batman Begins has a tighter pace means that there is no lingering time.

In the end it all comes down to one thing : "Has the audience gotten their money's worth".
With Batman definately. With Hulk no. People want Hulk to do some serious carnage.
Everytime i show Batman Begins to friends and relatives they really do like the movie.

I get that. I do. I've argued for years that Hulk was a comic book movie that arthouse fans didn't like & it was an arthouse movie that comic book fans didn't like.

 

[SuperFerret]

That's a pretty harsh comparison. Oh, you mean "a movie about nothing".

Exactly. Sure, it was Superman, but most of it seemed very day-to-day. There wasn't much fuss over Superman being back, it was more like "Hey Superman, what's up?" than "Superman! You're back! How was your trip?". The whole new Krypton thing was ridiculous, Luthor hasn't been that needlessly destructive since the 70's. The whole "love story" (if you could call it that) was really odd, and not in the "we love each other but can't be together" sense that was likely intended, it came off more like "yeah, we were a couple, and apparently we have a kid together, but we're really more like old friends who are slightly uncomfortable around each other".

That's just how I saw it.