The Better General Ross: Sam Elliott vs. William Hurt

Both characters were played well. Elliot was not as 3-Dimensional as Hurt IMO. Hurt was a Villain, who showed moments of humanity in his protectiveness. Elliot was a Patriot who showed moments of villainy (more so spite).

Thunderbolt Ross is a Villain type, and Hurt captured this well and better IMO.



*patriot-definition-doing what one thinks is right for state, country, and family*
 
I think a real thunderbolt ross would have at least attempted to take out abomination and probably would have never let banner hulk out, especially since he's spent five years of his life trying to find him.

same goes with the ending, a real ross would have tranqued the hulk and not just let him jump off.

FIVE years is a long time ya know. Ross is supposed to be passionate about taking out the hulk, even overzealous. You don't let something like that slip out of your hands unless you are one sided.

Hurt also didn't do any sort of job of defending himself against blonksy, he loooked like a naughty boy standing inthe corner when questioned about it by banner. Ross doesn't get sheepish under interrogation.

Look at Elliot's, He's happy to fry both the hulk and his dad if anything goes wrong, he doesn't care and he happily nukes them both BUT he never gets that satisfaction of knowing the hulk is gone, it's a empty victory, he know he hasn't won, so he continues searching even willing to forsake his relationship with his daughter for it by tapping her stuff.

There's a scene in the desert where both the hulk and ross make eye contact. You can tell the hulk wants the bad general to leave him alone while Ross is telling the hulk he's gonna have his balls for breakfast.

Plus general organisation and military knowledge as well as respect, I do think elliot's carried it off better

You're incorrect. The 'real' Ross has sided and worked with Hulk in the comic books before, albeit mostly because of extenuating circumstances, much like the one in my new favorite comic book adaption TIH.
 
...so... essentially what you are getting at is... he was playing Thunderbolt Ross.

Yep. I admitted originally he was closer to the comics, but Lee and Elliot improved on the character and made him more human and a better figure in a film.

Did I just say the Ang Lee movie improved an aspect of the ocmics. :eek: I'm about to get lynched by some fans, now. :p
 
Yep. I admitted originally he was closer to the comics, but Lee and Elliot improved on the character and made him more human and a better figure in a film.

Did I just say the Ang Lee movie improved an aspect of the ocmics. :eek: I'm about to get lynched by some fans, now. :p

Not taking away from Ang's and Elliot's Ross, but they missed the most important aspect of Ross, the 'Thunderbolt.' Ross is supposed to be a controlling loud mouth and boisterous, which Elliot wasn't. Hurt played him arrogant, calculating and hard nosed, like Ross is supposed to be.
 
I like Elliot's portrayal of General Ross, but I vote for Hurt because I think his performance merits the nickname "Thunderbolt" moreso than Elliot did. Hurt's General Ross is a man who is emotionally detached from his daughter, and wanted nothing more than to bring Banner into military custody. He's a guy you don't want to mess with, whereas Elliot brought a calmer, more calculating Ross who is more like your everyday general. Thunderbolt should be bigger-than-life, and I think Hurt nailed it.

That is how i feel.....Elliot is a good actor, but he was no Thunderbolt like in the comics which Hurt as you said " nailed it ".
 
No one has mentioned this yet....

Hurt's Ross was in charge all the way....Elliot's Ross actualy got DENIED access to the hulk near the end....because of TALBOT no less.

There is NO WAY Thunderbolt Ross would actually allow himself get SIDE-STEPPED by Glen Talbot.

That is a very good point...
 
I've not seen the Incredible Hulk yet, but I've never seen such an evenly split poll on these boards :wow:
 
William Hurt, no question about it. He's more like the old comic book Thunderbolt. Without the stubbled hair and so on. He's also more sturdy than Sam Elliot.
 
For me it's a draw, even though I feel TIH brought the Ahab aspects of Ross more to the forefront than the previous film did.
 
Both characters were played well. Elliot was not as 3-Dimensional as Hurt IMO.
How is Hurt more 3D? He's got no internal conflict whatsoever; he's just a bad guy. Elliot had a far better-written, more interesting position.
 
How is Hurt more 3D? He's got no internal conflict whatsoever; he's just a bad guy. Elliot had a far better-written, more interesting position.

Although he had internal conflict he didn't ever really show it or even discuss it. His emotions about Bruce's father overwhelmed him and never changed throughout the movie. He was 3-D, but not as much as Hurt IMO.

Elliot's conflict would have been better interpreted in a book, as where Hurt's was conveyed and expressed more visually on screen.

Hurt's Ross conveyed his disposition to the Hulk very vividly, and as well showed his paternal instincts in times when Betty was in danger.
 
READ Previous post 1st:

Elliot's Ross was well written...for a book that is, not for on screen.

Men in power are more inclined to be power hungry and hold on to that, than men are who have a grudge against a man well into his 30s whom has shown no signs of behaving like his father.

Up into the point of the Hulk, the only thing he had in common with his father is that he was in the same profession.
 
In my opinon Sam Elliott was a better Ross. Hurt's Ross was more villian then Sam's. That was not an actor's choice but they way it was written. Elliott would have played new Ross like Hurt, however Elliott would have given him more character. Hurt seemed to try to copy some of Sam's Ross. I believe the most obvious is the scene where Hurt is takeing the super soldier formula out of cooling. Sam would look at things with his head tilted and sqwinty eye in the original, and you can see Hurt trying this. Ross was written very differently this time around, especialy in his treatment of Betty. I suppose to show how focused he was on the Hulk capture. Im not saying Hurt's was awful. Im saying I liked Elliott's better.
 
I can dig it....

It's like Bale and Keaton. Bale captured the seriousness of Batman, but not the darkness IMO.

Keaton captured both seriousness and the darkness....just a better Bruce Wayne and Batman IMO in emotion and mindset [not by far though], but not necessarily appearance.

Elliot was good, definitely. But did not convey the "Thunderbolt" namesake. He was a good General Ross. Not a great Thunderbolt.

Whereas Hurt was a great Thunderbolt and General Ross.

IMO-IMO
 
Elliot was good, definitely. But did not convey the "Thunderbolt" namesake. He was a good General Ross. Not a great Thunderbolt.

Whereas Hurt was a great Thunderbolt and General Ross.
In what way was Hurt a good General? They portrayed him as a man whose desire to capture Banner/the Hulk outweighed his better military judgment. None of the encounters with the Hulk - or even just Banner, i.e., the Brazilian chase - went his way, and the biggest problem of the film (the Abomination), was one of his men losing his **** and breaking disciplined rank (repeatedly). I'm just not sure what you mean here.

Take, for example, the scenes in both movies where the Hulk encounters the military. In Hulk, The situation ends peacefully, with Banner back in military custody. In TIH, the Hulk beats Blonsky to a pulp and takes the General's daughter away for a romantic evening in a cave. :o
 
Hurt's Ross was much more of an *******, but that's mostly because Hurt was louder and less reserved, and his performance suffered for it.

Elliot felt like a real general, a real military man, not a cartoon parody of one. I could care less that Elliot wasn't so much "Thunderbolt" as neither film ever addressed him as such, and him being angry all the time would be pointless and eventually become bland and forced. There is one scene that he nailed that attitude, when he's interrogating Banner.

"YOU WERE FOUR YEARS OLD WHEN YOU SAW IT! HOW CAN YOU FORGET A THING LIKE THAT?"

There are several scenes in Hulk where he earns the Thunderbolt honors. Elliot was the better version all the way. I just don't think Hurt gave a good performance, period. He didn't have a consistent character. He was kind of all over the place.

Elliot's Ross has more depth, more relevance, better dialogue, more interesting character relevance to both Hulk, Betty and David Banner, and was just all around more interesting and relevant a take on the character. Seeing Ross sidestepped/overturned, that was interesting in the context of the character for me.

"I was gonna say damned".
 
Elliott was much better, both as an actor and the way his role was written.
 
In what way was Hurt a good General? I'm just not sure what you mean here.

Hurt's Desire for Ross in the pursuit of David showed the dichotomy of what a man should do and what a man wants to do.
As a General in the USAF he should be protecting his country from all threats foreign and domestic,
he Should be a great father ALL THE TIME,
he should help Bruce if not for the sake of being concerned for human life than for the sake of Betty.

BUT he doesn't because he wants the power of the Hulk
He wants to be in control and never feel like he is not
He wants to be in the Military History Books for making vast contributions to the US Military and not merely serving in it.

This is the conflict within him. We only see this, however, a few times. YES he is mostly a one-sided villian, but for a better reason than Elliot IMO.

Elliot holds a grudge and directs it towards David's son (Bruce). That is poor motivation in my mind. Who does that for that long.

Also, many military men have failures, not capturing the Hulk and spending millions of tax dollars on him does not mean that Hurt is a bad General Ross, just a bad general. Look at our military millions of dollars have gone to waste. That doesn't mean are generals aren't any good, just dumb decisions.
 
Hurt's portrayal was much more faithful. You're not supposed to like the guy. He's a total ass in the comics, unlike the way Elliot played him. Hurt was the better Ross.
 
Elliot holds a grudge and directs it towards David's son (Bruce). That is poor motivation in my mind. Who does that for that long.

That isn't his motivation. He's not just got a grudge. He has a potentially explosive and dangerous situation.
 
That isn't his motivation. He's not just got a grudge. He has a potentially explosive and dangerous situation.

If that was the case he would have tried to talk to Bruce and see what it was and see if he could get him some help....when he first heard about him going Hulk from "Talbot" or whatever.

Instead he didn't. As soon as the opportunity arose. He was basically running around and saying, "I told you so, I told you so. I knew he was no good."

I mean we knew he wasn't suppose like the Hulk and Banner for that from the comics, but holding a grudge because of his father. You can be concerned and suspicious about the guy without being a d*ck to him because of what his father did. Elliot was a d*ck to him, and Bruce had no clue why.

In 08 Bruce definitely knew why, heck we all did. AND Ross is supposed to be received that way. AS a First class D*Ck!
 
READ Previous post 1st:

Elliot's Ross was well written...for a book that is, not for on screen.

Men in power are more inclined to be power hungry and hold on to that, than men are who have a grudge against a man well into his 30s whom has shown no signs of behaving like his father.

Up into the point of the Hulk, the only thing he had in common with his father is that he was in the same profession.
However he was dating his daughter.

That film was as much about the hulk as it was about fathers and their respective relationships with their siblings.

I mean obviously ross doesn't think the apple has fallen far from the tree and doesn't want betty to get killed like bruce's mother did which is an underlying factor to the majority of his actions
 
Personally, I've never felt the military with regards to the hulk should be seen as bad, Ross is not a bad guy, he's just got a vendetta against the hulk and should just have it be more straining and personal based on the circumstances. Maybe do desperate things at times but by no means bad.

Hurt's ross was bad and just didn't care, there wasn't enough shades of grey in him. We are ultimately talking about fleshing out characters and making them life like rather than a direct translation from another medium

Again, if the mililtary's motivation is simply to stop the hulk then its one thing but when they are wanting to take/test and harness something, that's something different altogether. Notice how Ross' emotions to Talbot testing on banner gets him mad because he knows what could happen and ultimatley is very quick to respond to the situation.
 
Anyone who thinks Hurt's Ross was just a one dimensional bad guy clearly weren't watching the final act of the movie properly.
 
Well up till blonksy came along as abomination he was pretty much single minded, then failed to accept responsibility for his part in creating him (sheeping down to banner's questioning) and then wants to now help the hulk and let's him escape at the end but then ends up drunk in a bar without any real sense of achievement or purpose.

there was nothing particularly redeemable about the way he went about things with banner, his daughter or the hulk, let alone blonksy or anyone he had hurt by not making himself responsible. It's all even for a project that is no longer being funded (by my accounts).

So unless you saw he brought anything more to the table than that, i'm not particularly sure.

so yeah, he was an ass all the way through. One even willing to deviate from his hulk personal vendetta to help tony :confused:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,560
Messages
21,760,238
Members
45,597
Latest member
Netizen95
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"