I've always had a problem with this stance. In comics, the artists have interpreted the Hulk pretty much anyway imaginable. But to me, there's still a balance that should be struck. The great Sal Buscema managed to make the Hulk a bestial, gorilla-like monstrosity (which is how he should appear) but at the same time kept a slight resemblance to Banner. It's not as if the Hulk has a whole different skeleton & skull structure that just emerges from nowhere, it is still very much Banner, and I think in live action it helps with the realism.
By far, Ang's Hulk was better integrated into his environment than the last movie. Overall, TIH had a better color, and for some people, a better design, but clearly, Ang's Hulk looked to be in the scene, and emotionally, looked more realistic. I think a lot of that has to do with his resemblance to Bana. On top of that, TIH face was much more human looking than Ang's Hulk was anyway, TIH version was just far more angry and snarling all the time. Anytime he's calm, like when he's in the cave with Betty, he looks like a regular human much more than the previous incarnation.
The issue with the '03 film was inconsistency. There were shots were he looked terrible, then there's shots like when he turns to see Betty coming down the steps after his San Francisco rampage, where it was complete perfection. Yes, make the Hulk look like the animal he is, but leave a hint of Ruffalo in there. It won't do anything but help IMO