The Incredible Hulk - What went wrong?

TheVileOne

Eternal
Joined
Apr 3, 2002
Messages
69,893
Reaction score
14,389
Points
103
In the tradition of the Box Office Mojo Forums :D .

Also first, let me just say, that this is not a Hulk bashing thread. Unlike 2003, I really enjoyed this movie. I liked it a lot more. If you do not believe me, read my official review.

The point is that I think its worth discussing kind of if you feel the movie had flaws or problems that maybe could've affected its word of mouth with audiences, or the continued general apathy toward the character of the Hulk to general moviegoing audiences. When the Hulk is apparently supposed to one of the most popular and well known characters of all time.

People didn't want to address or brushed aside some of the problems a couple weeks ago, and never even considered they would come into play, which the did.

One of the biggest problems with the movie is confusing editing. At the beginning of the movie, the editing could've done a little more to separate itself from the first movie. Despite the opening credit sequences, it starts with Bruce in South America like the end of the first movie. This kind of makes people think it could be a sequel.

That's the other problem the movie faced, the sequelitis. Watching the movie its clearly NOT a sequel to 2003 Hulk. This is its own separate universe, continuity, and storyline for the Hulk. However, while we might get that, it was somewhat vague in the trailers and TV spots. And also, I think that there was some trepidation at Marvel in not just coming out and saying THIS IS NOT A SEQUEL! It seems they would say everything but that. Which I don't really get. Maybe there was the sense of not making it sound like a total separation for whatever reason, but it was. The arctic scene pre or right after the credits could've established more that this would not be a sequel to the audience.

Also, gas prices and the economy don't come into play here. If those were really the biggest issues facing movies and BO, then numerous BO hits that have been released in May and June would not be hits.

Another editing problem with the movie, not that it felt gutted, but you have Ty Burrell playing Leonard Samson. Going into the movie and watching it cold, you would never know this. No one ever says his name in the movie. As a character he serves virtually no consequence or purpose in the movie in the narrative or running time. Basically, the Ty Burrell character could've been easily cut and the movie would've lost nothing. OK now, if there's an argument that keeping him in the current edit shows, "Well Betty has moved on with her life and she's happy and stuff, and Bruce is sad when he sees her with another man." OK well, as soon as Betty sees Bruce, Ty Burrell does absolutely nothing. Betty no longer cares about Ty Burrell's character as soon as Bruce enters back into her life. When they are on the run, they easily start smooching and would've had infidelous sex had Bruce not gotten "excited".

It's very annoying that this happens, and the issue of Betty's boyfriend is never brought up. You would think Bruce would at least mention it to her or something. Supposedly there are scenes (according to other threads) left on the cutting room floor that would show Samson giving away Bruce to the feds. This is not clear at all watching the movie. It's a little ambiguous, but for the most part it comes off as very confusing as to how the military were able to find Bruce and Betty at the campus at all. As far as I remember, in the cut we saw, Samson never saw Bruce and wouldn't know he was there.

MARKETING

The big play this year was for Iron Man. Pretty much all the hype, marketing, and build up went to Iron Man for this summer. It was a move that paid off, but unfortunately partly at the expense of The Incredible Hulk. However, this was a smart move. Iron Man did not have the baggage of the Hulk going in. Iron Man got the better marketing and hype, and Iron Man performed tremendously. People got excited about this movie and were ready for a movie like Iron Man to come out.

Here is something else people wanted to ignore on the road to June 13. Where was the marketing? Some publications were addressing that no one knows the movie is coming. By about mid-March we'd virtually seen little to nothing in way of news stories, posters, one sheets, et all. Some stuff and screenshots on the net, some casting announcements, the con panels, but that's it. Very little to go on with the mainstream moviegoing public. The first teaser trailer came out only 3 months before the movie's release. I think it came too late. 2003 movie is why. By virtue of the 2003 movie, the marketing needed to get the drop on audiences a lot quicker, let the audiences know this movie was coming and when, and say we are going to do the Hulk right this time. I don't believe 3 months was long enough to convince audiences, and it turned out many who predicted this were right.

Right before the movie's release, TV spots started spoiling the Iron Man/Tony Stark cameo, which gets one of the biggest reactions out of the entire movie. The cameo had been widely talked about at that point, William Hurt publically revealed it in an MTV interview. So it wasn't like some best kept secret at that point. So if you are going to exploit the popularity of Iron Man/Tony Stark in the marketing like that, it could've happened like right after Iron man's $101 million opening.

Maybe that's another thing that could've helped the movie. More cross-promotion between Iron Man and Hulk, however then that could've been problematic because you could maybe say that Hulk could tarnish Iron Man.

CONTROVERSY

The ultimate affect this had is very arguable. But the movie had a bit of a cloud over it when you had all this news coming out about the disagreements. Sure a lot of movies go through this. And the media more than likely blew it out of proportion. However, Norton did very little to promote the movie publically, he did little to talk about it, and was mostly quiet about it. Perhaps a better compromise could've been made in the cuts. As the movie stands now, it doesn't necessarily need to be deeper, but it could've used a couple more scenes to clarify what was going on. And the arctic scene sounds like it definitely should not have left.

Overblown or not, the controversy didn't help the movie too much. And it kind of set in weird ideas in the heads of fans of exactly what kind of movie we might be getting. Not saying that's true, but the mainstream media even at its least credible still has a big influence on the way people think.

IN CONCLUSION

With Iron Man continuing to rake in the dough, The Incredible Hulk will not turn out to be a terrible loss. It will still take in, maybe close to $140-150 million US. And I think no matter what Marvel comes out ahead this summer. It was a better movie, but audiences and critics still weren't convinced and generally are still apathetic about the character.

This puts a question mark of the future of these characters on film. Everyone says they signed up for three movies or had plans for multiple movies (as did the actors for the 2003 movie). I have no idea where Norton's head could be at with the character right now. Would he still want to play the character again somewhere else?

And what do you do with the Hulk? Everyone knew a new Hulk movie could not cost less. This movie cost more than the first one. It'd be very hard to make an Incredible Hulk sequel that was cheaper. Especially if you want Norton and co. to return.

People say Hulk and Avengers. Or Hulk and Iron Man 2. But would Hulk help or hurt the movies if he had a presence there? Tough call.
 
i think the main problem is that the 2003 movie really turned people off to seeing "another" Hulk movie too soon. the 2003 movie had a big opening, but tailed off because it just wasn't very appealing to the general audience. (for reasons i won't go into, because we've all stated our reasons why it failed)

there's also a dilemna in deciding whether Marvel should market this new film as a "sequel" or a "completely new reboot". if people think it's a "reboot", they'll be like "ugh.. not again.". and if people think it's a sequel, they'll be like "well, the first one wasn't too good, but maybe they got it right this time". so, i personally think it would've helped if they would've marketed it as a "sequel with a new cast and better plot".

also, this summer is overloaded with action flicks, maybe it would've been more wise to release this at some other time. where it wouldn't have to compete against other big films such as: Iron Man, Indiana Jones, and Batman.
 
But the fact is that the movie was NOT a sequel. And was a reboot. But that dilemna did come into play for the marketing, and it kind of showed.

I think 5 years was kind of soon to do it. But they had wanted another movie since the first one came out. It was really Universal who became unenthusiastic about it.
 
well, obviously the Marvel people thought it would be best to make a "reboot" of the origin part, to help the 2nd movie do well at the box office. personally, i don't think it was even necessary to change the origin. 2003's movie did it's job of foundationizing the origin. i think Marvel should've just took the ball and ran with it, going into making a sequel(with this new cast), and call it a sequel.
later on down the road, how are they gonna put a box set of DVDs together? not include Ang Lee's as the 1st movie?? that doesn't help profits, to not include it.
 
The problem was partially the marketing, or lack thereof. The problem was also the general apathy the public has towards the character thanks to the 2003 version. I imagine this'll have quite good DVD sales once word gets around to those who are apathetic, especially with the endless "Avengers" box sets that are sure to come (IM/TIH 2-pack in 2010, IM/IM2/TIH/Thor 4-pack in 2011, etc)

I also don't think this will end being a huge loss, or really any loss for Marvel. They weren't expecting anywhere near Iron Man numbers (they weren't expecting anywhere near Iron Man numbers for Iron Man either). They said a 45M opening + good legs would be good for them, so I'm sure they're kinda pleased with about 100M in 11 days. Not over the moon, obviously, but this could have easily done far worse.

I think that, at the end of the day, Marvel made this movie more to set up the Avengers than to launch a solo Hulk franchise. People who have seen this Hulk, generally speaking, no longer have the bad flavor of the '03 film in their mouths, so it'll be a joy for them to see Hulk again in Avengers. I think Avengers was Hulk's next stop, and it was always intended to be. If they were thinking of a TIH sequel before Avengers, they wouldn't have been so quick to put out a 3 year schedule that didn't include one a month before its release.
 
if people think it's a "reboot", they'll be like "ugh.. not again.". and if people think it's a sequel, they'll be like "well, the first one wasn't too good, but maybe they got it right this time". so, i personally think it would've helped if they would've marketed it as a "sequel with a new cast and better plot".

also, this summer is overloaded with action flicks, maybe it would've been more wise to release this at some other time. where it wouldn't have to compete against other big films such as: Iron Man, Indiana Jones, and Batman.

Wouldn't they think the reverse?

But anyway, how could they have marketed it as a sequel, when it isn't a sequel? And also, it's not competing against Iron Man. Iron Man has been in cinemas now for just over 7 weeks, and it's from the same studio as The Incredible Hulk.

the movie was NOT a sequel. And NOT a reboot.

How is it not a reboot?

I think 5 years was kind of soon to do it.

Agreed.
 
how are they gonna put a box set of DVDs together? not include Ang Lee's as the 1st movie?? that doesn't help profits, to not include it.

It isn't the first movie any more. It's been erased from the record. What would be the point in including it? And how would it not help profits to not include it? I don't see how including it could in any way help profits, considering how much most people hate it.
 
This is my take on it:

- The movie has flaws, yes, the editing is choppy at bits, you can tell some bits of the story seems to be missing, which almost always happens when studios chop off a movie for pace´s sake (coughDaredevilcough). There are some big plot holes. Some of the dialogue gets too comic booky, especially towards the end (I didn´t mind "Hulk smash!", though). Still, as an overall product, I felt TIH was a solid movie, entertaining without being too silly and serious without becoming dull, it was definitely a good time at the theater and something I´m sure most Hulk fans enjoyed. I don´t see the quality of the movie being reason for a 61% drop. I think something between 50% and 55% would have been more fair, and satisfying for the studio.

- The weight of the Ang Lee version is something of large importance, I think. If this had been the movie they released back in 2003, I think it´d have been huge. Lee´s Hulk had a strong opening, so there clearly was interest in the character.

- One problem is it´s hard doing a serious Hulk movie and promoting it in a way that doesn´t bring back any feelings of being a sequel to Lee´s movie. He got it wrong, but he didn´t make Batman & Robin, it wasn´t so horribly wrong in tone and style that it´d be easy to make a serious, solid movie and sell it to the audience and still completely distance itself from his take. Maybe it would have been easier if Marvel had waited a little more. WB waited eight years to release another Batman and it still had to overcome the burden of that movie.

- I think they waited a little too long to start doing more promotion for the movie, maybe not trailers, cuz of the FX but overall promotion - why not do viral sites, the way Cloverfield and TDK did: They´re inexpensive, you don´t have to even show footage from the movie and still get people intrigued and excited.

- It was a mistake to start the first trailer with Banner talking to a shrink, a scene that didn´t even make it to the movie and brought back memories of Lee´s heavy psychodrama approach.

-
 
The 2003 film had less of an effect than many are willing to admit, it seems. TIH had a solid opening weekend, belying the notion that lingering trepidation would determine this movie's box office fate. If that were the case, we'd be seeing a lukewarm (much moreso) opening weekend, followed by continued, steady interest from audiences in the following weeks - not unlike was the case with Batman Begins. Whether or not that ultimately is the case remains to be seen, as the film has only been out for a week now - but the trend thusfar is not especially promising. The simplest explanation is probably correct: TIH doesn't have particularly good legs because it isn't a particularly good movie, even in the "dumb-summer-action-fun"-sense that it seems to have been banking on.
 
The 2003 film had less of an effect than many are willing to admit, it seems. TIH had a solid opening weekend, belying the notion that lingering trepidation would determine this movie's box office fate. If that were the case, we'd be seeing a lukewarm (much moreso) opening weekend, followed by continued, steady interest from audiences in the following weeks - not unlike was the case with Batman Begins. Whether or not that ultimately is the case remains to be seen, as the film has only been out for a week now - but the trend thusfar is not especially promising. The simplest explanation is probably correct: TIH doesn't have particularly good legs because it isn't a particularly good movie, even in the "dumb-summer-action-fun"-sense that it seems to have been banking on.

It was a smaller opening than the first, and five years later, that is, if you consider ticket sales it was a lot less, so it was lukewarm. And it still was relatively good because comic book fans showed up, but it didn´t interest average moviegoers. BB still had a five-day opening of 73m, it was much easier to distance itself from B&R in marketing than TIH, and in its second weekend it faced Bewitched, which tanked.
 
The problem I personally had with this movie is that it abandons any sort of plot in the 3rd act. Once Blonsky turns into the abomination (a transformation they don't even show on film!) there is no point to anything. There is no story driving this battle... there is no real reason to cheer for one over the other... it just becomes a CGI rumble in the street. That may be good enough for kids and action enthusiasts, but if you want to see a movie then it doesn't really hold up. As a result I sort of left the movie feeling... meh.
 
According to EW, people in the industry were predicting $60-65 million opening weekend for Incredible Hulk. This is the Angelina Jolie cover issue.

Either way a dropoff of 61% is bad and says word of mouth for the movie wasn't that great. Even with tough competition. Because The Incredible Hulk still finished ahead of The Love Guru. Big competition is the nature of the summer movie season.

Also, Jessica Alba is a bad actress and she isn't a BO draw.
 
What went wrong:

Ang Lee

Ang Lee

Ang Lee

And finally, I liked the movie but it isn't exactly a "good movie". It's entertaining and fun but it's basically just dumb fun, it's a close but no potatos type of film to me. It just plain isn't as good as Iron Man, if it were I think that it would be holding up a bit better.
 
People need to stop talking about Iron Man numbers as it pertains to the Hulk. Of course no one expected to do Iron Man numbers. If it did a little more than half of Iron Man numbers that would probably be considered very good-great.

But before Iron Man came out, we didn't have a big perception of what these huge Iron Man numbers would be. We were hoping for like $200-225 million. And look at the BO predictions The Incredible Hulk. A lot of people here predicted this movie to do around that and more. So before Iron man came out, people here were expecting Hulk to do much bigger.
 
^ No you are wrong. The highest I expected Hulk to do was 200 million and minimum 150 million.
 
Where I think it went wrong was with the release date. I'm not saying a different year, I mean a date later this year, a date further away from Iron Man's. Why I say this is because IM's buzz still hadn't died down by the time TIH came out, some would think it's a good thing but I think it hindered the movie. Look at the tony stark tv spot, the effect marvel were hoping for was that it would encourage people to go see hulk, I believe it just made people want to go see IM again. I honestly don't know why they spaced the two movies so close to each anyway.

The next mistake was marketing, Marvel didn't want hulk hindering IM's marketing, which in the end was costly for hulk. So instead of doing the smart thing and pushing the date back, allowing more time for marketing, they decided to stuff it all into 3 weeks. Now at first I thought this was a good idea, keeping it fresh in people's minds but I soon realised this didn't allowed time for people to wake up that this wasn't a sequel, which brings me onto my next point. The marketing outright sucked at distancing this movie from '03, it almost seemed like they made no effort, a later release date would allow more time to distance the movie and the fx to progress enough for really great trailers. There's the fact that Marvel themselves couldn't decide if this was a sequel or a reboot, how the hell are supposed the know if they couldn't decide? The added time would also help them make up their minds.

Lastly, the whole Norton vs Marvel issue. It seems Marvel just wanted to get it over with as soon as possible and just said no to Norton's more psychological cut of the film. Now I loved the movie, really loved it but I feel Norton's cut would've been even better, with more thought and character development in it, though not overpowering like Ang's. If they had more time before the movies release the matter could've been sorted out properly instead of rushing it through because of a release date fast approaching. I'd also like to say they'd have more time to work on the editing of the movie which I feel was one of it's weaker points.

I also think they were harsh on R&H, the guys needed more time, they were putting in so many hours because marvel stupidly didn't allow enough time for the CG. I think R&H did a great job but it could've been so much better.
 
What went wrong:

Ang Lee

Ang Lee

Ang Lee

And finally, I liked the movie but it isn't exactly a "good movie". It's entertaining and fun but it's basically just dumb fun, it's a close but no potatos type of film to me. It just plain isn't as good as Iron Man, if it were I think that it would be holding up a bit better.

I agree with everything you said. :yay:
 
Word of mouth where i live has been great. I have yet to meet a person who did not really enjoy this film.

Why a movie like Transformers does really well and not TIH is beyond me. As both are big Summer action films. Only Diff is that TIH was a far better summer action film.

I think the blame has to go the marketing and Ang Lee's film.
 
I agree with most of what's been said here. I really enjoyed this movie, but it was too short. They cut out too much footage that would've supported the story. Also, there is so much competition, right now. TIH is just another summer action movie in the midst of a bunch of other movies that people are talking about. It doesn't stand out as the "must-see" movie of the moment.
 
I think the biggest problem lies in the lack of advanced marketing. Did anyone, besides us fanboys, know about this movie prior to May of 2008?
 
I think the biggest problem lies in the lack of advanced marketing. Did anyone, besides us fanboys, know about this movie prior to May of 2008?


I think that was a major problem and they didn't do enough to distance this from the 2003 version. I think the people who go see it will be pleasantly suprised though.
 
^ No you are wrong. The highest I expected Hulk to do was 200 million and minimum 150 million.

http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=297453

Look how many people voted it would do $200 million or more. That's even more voting with $175 million or more.

People only say, "Oh we never expected Iron Man numbers for this movie anyway" now. But before Iron Man came out LESS THAN TWO MONTHS AGO none of us were really sure Iron Man would be this big. $300 million +.

The first Hulk movie which opened bigger, had a teaser trailer in the summer of 2002, about a year before its release.
 
Another editing problem with the movie, not that it felt gutted, but you have Ty Burrell playing Leonard Samson. Going into the movie and watching it cold, you would never know this. No one ever says his name in the movie. As a character he serves virtually no consequence or purpose in the movie in the narrative or running time. Basically, the Ty Burrell character could've been easily cut and the movie would've lost nothing. OK now, if there's an argument that keeping him in the current edit shows, "Well Betty has moved on with her life and she's happy and stuff, and Bruce is sad when he sees her with another man." OK well, as soon as Betty sees Bruce, Ty Burrell does absolutely nothing. Betty no longer cares about Ty Burrell's character as soon as Bruce enters back into her life. When they are on the run, they easily start smooching and would've had infidelous sex had Bruce not gotten "excited".

It's very annoying that this happens, and the issue of Betty's boyfriend is never brought up. You would think Bruce would at least mention her to something. Supposedly there is something that happens that was left on the cutting room floor that would show Samson giving away Bruce to the feds. This is not clear at all watching the movie. It's a little ambiguous, but for the most part it comes off as very confusing as to how the military were able to find Bruce and Betty at the campus at all. As far as I remember, in the cut we saw, Samson never saw Bruce and wouldn't know he was there.



i'm not even considering that character to actually be anyone besides betty's boyfriend . "sampson" technically never saw bruce but i'm sure the old guy explained betty taking off on him . i dont think he was unecessary
but i wouldnt delve too deep into that character either.
 
Marvel Studios failed to market it properly, choosing to put their eggs in Iron Man's basket. We've been discussing it for months.
 
Having read the Novel of the film, I honestly believe if that had been translated on screen exactly, we'd have the perfect movie.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"