The Avengers The Avengers: News and Speculation - Part 27A sub-section 12

[BigThor]

I agree as well, that's why I think Banner's recast is easier to handle than a Cap, Thor, or Iron Man recast.

He transforms, they don't

 

[JAK®]

Hulk fans are used to change ...literally.

 

[Dark Raven]

So then you had to have seen this .....

[YT]SPMiA-IctwI[/YT]

It wasn't Avatar, but they certainly used Norton as reference.

In that video, Kevin Feige says that the Hulk looks real - that there are closeups where you'd swear they took a bodybuilder and painted him green. I never thought this at any point. Hulk still looks like an animated character. His skin is too mottled and there are times he still has a weightlessness about him. Also, the fakest shot is the last one in the video, where Hulk roars when he lands in that campus field. To me, that has always looked the most unrealistic of all the shots.

I hope he looks much more realistic for the Avengers, especially if he's going to act alongside the other members.

 

[Mercurius]

I still think Ang Lee's Hulk looks far superior to Letterrier's. The creature, I mean.

The 2003 scenes in the desert are really my Hulk favourites in the Silver Screen. It really felt real and I really appreciate to watch it.

Not to say that 2008 Hulk has, for me, the wrong face: Lee's had a much wider scale of expressions, and was more fierce, more brute. And the weightlessness Night Raven duly observed.

I hope Marvel also notices these important differences: the 2008 movie had a better story (and a better Banner in Norton) until the final fight, which was just stupid, videogame kinda thing. But the 2003 version is yet the outstanding result, considering the creature.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

I disagree, I thought there were moments where it looked incredibly realistic.

As for the realistic physics, i'm sure that will look better since they're using the actor for the full mo-cap thing

 

[Iron_Stark]

So then you had to have seen this .....

[YT]SPMiA-IctwI[/YT]

It wasn't Avatar, but they certainly used Norton as reference.

Yeah that's the one.

Still, it's not the same as when Zoe Saldana was the blue girl from AVATAR with the camera in her face and the dots all over her body actually doing the dialog, acting and (some) stunts.

In the Hulk, a stunt double with the mo-cap suit was just mimicking what Norton wanted them to do and did all the fight scenes with Tim Roth in a mo-cap suit. Norton was pretty much being the director for the Hulk's actions.

Unless there's video of Norton in a mo-cap suit, then it's not the same as what Ruffalo is going to do.

edit

But Norton to his credit wanted to be and was way more involved with the Hulk than Bana was.

 

[Rock Sexton]

I still think Ang Lee's Hulk looks far superior to Letterrier's. The creature, I mean.

The 2003 scenes in the desert are really my Hulk favourites in the Silver Screen. It really felt real and I really appreciate to watch it.

Not to say that 2008 Hulk has, for me, the wrong face: Lee's had a much wider scale of expressions, and was more fierce, more brute. And the weightlessness Night Raven duly observed.

I hope Marvel also notices these important differences: the 2008 movie had a better story (and a better Banner in Norton) until the final fight, which was just stupid, videogame kinda thing. But the 2003 version is yet the outstanding result, considering the creature.

2003's movie was dreadful in every way imaginable. But to each his own.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

I wouldn't say EVERY way imaginable. I really loved the idea of Hulk's uncontrollable existence being due to major repressed trauma, not only an experiment. That was a cool hook to add to the character of Bruce Banner, and it really added to the drama of 'making Hulk angry', making it more about pure rage and anger, instead of just getting excited.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

Lee's version had it's moments and I still like it overall but Incredible is the superior Hulk movie imo. Especially in the way it feels like a real Hulk movie, something the 2003 version didn't capture as well.

As far as graphics, IH had a few scenes where he clearly looked cgi, but so did '03 Hulk, and Gollum too for that matter. I also preferred the darker green color, the size and the body and facial features of Leterrier's Hulk, and if you're going to call the last fight in IH a videogame I'm curious to know what you'd called the fight with Absorbin' Dad.

 

[Hurm...]

I prefer 2003's Hulk way more than the 2008 version. It had better drama, maybe too much, but I enjoyed it.

 

[Gunga Diner]

I prefer 2003's Hulk way more than the 2008 version. It had better drama, maybe too much, but I enjoyed it.

Yeah, that's how I feel.

I'm nervous about how Hulk will look in The Avengers. If the 2008 movie didn't have the budget to make Hulk look realistic, I don't know how they'll be able to even it out when they also have to have the effects for all the other characters.

 

[flickchick85]

I too really liked the 2003 version, but even then I hated the 3rd act. And I also just liked TIH. I simply haven't seen a Hulk movie that I've loved, so as a result, he's the Avengers character I care the least about (and no, I haven't seen Cap or Thor yet, but I've read Thor's script and I love the story of Cap, so I already care about them more). I feel bad in hoping that the VFX budget is gonna keep his presence to minimum.

 

[Mercurius]

I too really liked the 2003 version, but even then I hated the 3rd act. And I also just liked TIH.

Exactly. The third act in Ang Lee's version is disgraceful.

And Letterrier lost his chance not making a tragic movie: Hulk could be a great movie if the audiences left the theatre devastated by Banner's fate in life.

Nobody could yet convey this strong sense of a man lost inside a creature. Strangely enough, many episodes of Bixby's Hulk had this feel, this bitter sense.

It was crap considering the whole thing, but there was something important there the new movies should be able to bring about.

 

[Doctor Jones]

I think it's quite good actually. The third act as well. Those flashes of Hulk and his father in the clouds are so pictureesque.

 

[Hurm...]

All this talk is making me want to watch it again.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

All this talk is making me want to watch it again.

I watched it again last week and imo it still holds up pretty well. One thing IH didn't have is Josh Lucas playing Talbot. Man he was a prick.

And I will never, ever tire of the tank throw.

 

[Herolee10]

Idk...I think the 2003 version was way too dramatic for my tastes, not to mention the choice in editing for the film since Ang Lee had gone for that comic strip visual route. Hell I heard that it's because of this choice, where the actors really felt frustrated at times because they had to do the same scene so many times.


And honestly, seeing Norton's version of the Hulk, I felt sorry for the dude from what I saw in the film.


The film literally opens up with him having been on the run and isolated from everyone he cares about for 5 years. And the way that he has to travel back home, from being homeless and such, along with how much of a toll his transformations seem to take on him, I'd say that it was pretty sad to see imho.

 

[Rock Sexton]

And Letterrier lost his chance not making a tragic movie: Hulk could be a great movie if the audiences left the theatre devastated by Banner's fate in life.

No offense, but Norton/Letterrier wanted to give the movie that kind of feel .... especially with .....

[YT]xwrkR3PELJ8[/YT]

I still can't believe they were over-ruled in using that footage. I know it says "opening", but it quite honestly could've been a great ending scene.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

And honestly, seeing Norton's version of the Hulk, I felt sorry for the dude from what I saw in the film.


The film literally opens up with him having been on the run and isolated from everyone he cares about for 5 years. And the way that he has to travel back home, from being homeless and such, along with how much of a toll his transformations seem to take on him, I'd say that it was pretty sad to see imho.

The deleted scene where he breaks down at dinner with Betty and Leonard is very effective at getting this across. I can't fathom why they left it out.

 

[Rock Sexton]

Idk...I think the 2003 version was way too dramatic for my tastes, not to mention the choice in editing for the film since Ang Lee had gone for that comic strip visual route. Hell I heard that it's because of this choice, where the actors really felt frustrated at times because they had to do the same scene so many times.

The movie was The Hulk in name only. I thought the psycho-drama was extremely overplayed. I couldn't buy any into of the actors who portrayed key figures in Hulk's known Marvel Universe. I also thought the Hulk was too big and too taffy looking.

And honestly, seeing Norton's version of the Hulk, I felt sorry for the dude from what I saw in the film.

The film literally opens up with him having been on the run and isolated from everyone he cares about for 5 years. And the way that he has to travel back home, from being homeless and such, along with how much of a toll his transformations seem to take on him, I'd say that it was pretty sad to see imho.

The only thing I feel sorry for when it comes to Norton is that he and Letterrier weren't able to issue the cut he wanted. Other than that, I thought the film came out fantastically. Stark contrast to 2003, this one felt like a comic book movie that the new Marvel Cinema Universe is calling for. The cast was almost perfect from head to toe .... I thought guys like Hurt, Nelson, Roth, and Norton all fit the eccentricities of a comic book character come to life on screen.

The CGI was a mixed bag. I thought he was the perfect size and there were some scenes where he looked absolutely fantastic (Campus fight, Cave, bottling plant) .... but there were some areas they could've touched up more.

I seriously can't stop raving about this film. It never gets old. I get bored watching either of the Iron Man films.

 

[WildcatNC]

It never gets old. I get bored watching either of the Iron Man films.

I agree with this. I can watch TIH any number of times and still enjoy it. I have to wait awhile to catch the Iron Man films again.

 

[Herolee10]

The deleted scene where he breaks down at dinner with Betty and Leonard is very effective at getting this across. I can't fathom why they left it out.

Would anyone have a link to that scene? I've been trying to look for it for a long time now.

And based on what I've heard of it, yeah, I wonder why they had to cut it out as well.

Heck, I wish that they had kept in the original beginning, where bruce had tried to commit suicide since that's the first time that I have ever heard of a version of Bruce Banner on trying to take that route.

The movie was The Hulk in name only. I thought the psycho-drama was extremely overplayed. I couldn't buy any into of the actors who portrayed key figures in Hulk's known Marvel Universe. I also thought the Hulk was too big and too taffy looking.



The only thing I feel sorry for when it comes to Norton is that he and Letterrier weren't able to issue the cut he wanted. Other than that, I thought the film came out fantastically. Stark contrast to 2003, this one felt like a comic book movie that the new Marvel Cinema Universe is calling for. The cast was almost perfect from head to toe .... I thought guys like Hurt, Nelson, Roth, and Norton all fit the eccentricities of a comic book character come to life on screen.

The CGI was a mixed bag. I thought he was the perfect size and there were some scenes where he looked absolutely fantastic (Campus fight, Cave, bottling plant) .... but there were some areas they could've touched up more.

I seriously can't stop raving about this film. It never gets old. I get bored watching either of the Iron Man films.

Agreed on all points. My only problems with the film itself is that they had to cut out some of the great scenes that I've either seen or read about online.

That, and I think the Incredible Hulk should have been released AFTER Iron Man 2, in order to have audiences more familiar with the Hulk by the time the Avengers came out since the key focus seems to be going on Iron Man, CA, and Thor.

 

[Spider-Vader]

I agree as well, that's why I think Banner's recast is easier to handle than a Cap, Thor, or Iron Man recast.

He transforms, they don't

My friend made a joke that in the movies each time he Hulks out his Banner appearance changes. Seems to be true so far.

 

[BigThor]

I agree with this. I can watch TIH any number of times and still enjoy it. I have to wait awhile to catch the Iron Man films again.

Same here, TIH is a highly underrated film in my opinion especially the Hulk's design. Norton was just as good of a Banner as Bixby to me, and the Hulk's CGI was slightly above average. but everything else about him was perfect (skin texture, color. rippling veins etc).

The story moved at a much better pace than 03's Hulk and it's just an overall highly "enjoyable" film that doesn't really get old imo.

TIH's campus battle is one of my favorite Marvel film action scenes ever, I even like it more than Hulk 2003's "desert battle".

 

[gkokujin]

as much as i hated the 2003 movie, Hulks skin texture was just about perfect.

there were subtle things that i noticed like how the skin dimpled when bullets bounced off him, and how he wasn't over ripped. THAT was what made that hulk great.

The 2008 Hulk was Great as well. I think it was very hard for the human eye to adjust to that much freaking GREEN though. it was almost like even the dirt on him was green.