The Incredible Hulk - What went wrong?

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

well, you feel different then the majority of people who saw Serenity...and that's really a poor critique to be saying a movie sucks.

I personally love that gorram movie...and in the immortal words of The Dude: "that's just, like, your opinion, man..."

Agreed, Serenity is one of the best movies of the last 5 years, awesome, simply awesome.

 

[November Rain]

Ang lee's hulk had absolutely nothing to do with this film's box office results.

if it did, then it's directly a marketing problem for not setting it up properly, nothing to do with carrying on of vibes.

 

[DragonLord]

No doubt about it in this forum's mind, Marvell drop the ball in this one. But the Hulk will gross $200 Mil worldwide by the time it fades out, and it right now has $176 Mil. Now like I said before, the kicker on this is the DVD Release. If Director LL, and Marvell, don't get their heads out of you know what, and do and extended version release, then in the Immortal words of that Space Marine, "Game over man, game over". t:

 

[SpaghettiHULK]

TIH actually is currently at 201 mln WW.

 

[TNC9852002]

I'm betting it's just the character that people don't find entertaining anymore I suppose.

-TNC

 

[<borkis>]

Ang lee's hulk had absolutely nothing to do with this film's box office results.

if it did, then it's directly a marketing problem for not setting it up properly, nothing to do with carrying on of vibes.

It had a lot to do with it. It wasn't a popular film and soured a lot of people on the character. If that film was never made and this was the first hulk film, it's box office would probably be up about %50.

 

[November Rain]

It had a lot to do with it. It wasn't a popular film and soured a lot of people on the character. If that film was never made and this was the first hulk film, it's box office would probably be up about %50.

This is nonesense. Look at the bond franchise pretty much redoing itself all the time with different bonds.

when one fizzles out, the next one doesn't take it on the chin when they do cast again.

Die another day was horrible and it had no effect on Casino Royale what so ever.

People are old enough to watch a film on its own merits without 'carryover feelings'. It's been five years already, no one even cares except for us fans.

only thign i am hearing is people saying 'why didn't they just do a sequel to the other one', I haven't heard a single person going 'the first one was crap so i'm not seeing this one'. Probably exactly the same people who saw the first one saw the second.

This ang lee thing is a complete myth that has no physical grounds.

unless you can provide some survey of all those put off by the new film as a sample of the population then it really just sounds like fans of TIH being bitter.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

This Hulk's failure at the boxoffice dosn't make Ang Lee's successful.

 

[SFII]

This is nonesense. Look at the bond franchise pretty much redoing itself all the time with different bonds.

when one fizzles out, the next one doesn't take it on the chin when they do cast again.

Die another day was horrible and it had no effect on Casino Royale what so ever.

People are old enough to watch a film on its own merits without 'carryover feelings'. It's been five years already, no one even cares except for us fans.

only thign i am hearing is people saying 'why didn't they just do a sequel to the other one', I haven't heard a single person going 'the first one was crap so i'm not seeing this one'. Probably exactly the same people who saw the first one saw the second.

This ang lee thing is a complete myth that has no physical grounds.

unless you can provide some survey of all those put off by the new film as a sample of the population then it really just sounds like fans of TIH being bitter.

well, it's kindof a lose-lose situation for Marvel.
the first "lose":
Ang Lee's movie DID have an affect on the new movie. Ang's movie wasn't one of those "wow, i gotta go see it" type of movies. his movie was a little bit too deep and too serious-toned. perhaps the plot just wasn't that good. but there was a lot of hype. people went to go see it the first weekend. and then it dropped off. so, Ang's movie did leave a bad taste in people's mouths, and a "sequel" wouldn't do much to draw them back in. and TIH is feeling the consequences of it.
and the second "lose":
for TIH, if you call it a "reboot", people will be like "been there, done that".

 

[Chewy]

This is nonesense. Look at the bond franchise pretty much redoing itself all the time with different bonds.

when one fizzles out, the next one doesn't take it on the chin when they do cast again.

Die another day was horrible and it had no effect on Casino Royale what so ever.

People are old enough to watch a film on its own merits without 'carryover feelings'. It's been five years already, no one even cares except for us fans.

only thign i am hearing is people saying 'why didn't they just do a sequel to the other one', I haven't heard a single person going 'the first one was crap so i'm not seeing this one'. Probably exactly the same people who saw the first one saw the second.

This ang lee thing is a complete myth that has no physical grounds.

unless you can provide some survey of all those put off by the new film as a sample of the population then it really just sounds like fans of TIH being bitter.

THIS is nonsense. Bond, much like Batman before him, has a history of some beloved films (Dr. No, Goldfinger, etc) with a few stinkers sprinkled in. There may be the occasional poor movie, but his film history has bought enough goodwill with film goers that the producers can move on with a good film without worry that the one film will sour the franchise forever. Hulk, on the other hand, had a very disliked movie right out of the gates, souring the franchise for future installments.

 

[Evil Twin]

I'd be surprised if the first impression of The Hulk for most viewers wasn't Bill Bixby's series, instead of Ang Lee's movie. Which didn't open up at a pace to make $200 million, despite revisionist history, or end up all that disliked on places like IMDB.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

This is nonesense. Look at the bond franchise pretty much redoing itself all the time with different bonds.

when one fizzles out, the next one doesn't take it on the chin when they do cast again.

Die another day was horrible and it had no effect on Casino Royale what so ever.

People are old enough to watch a film on its own merits without 'carryover feelings'. It's been five years already, no one even cares except for us fans.

only thign i am hearing is people saying 'why didn't they just do a sequel to the other one', I haven't heard a single person going 'the first one was crap so i'm not seeing this one'. Probably exactly the same people who saw the first one saw the second.

This ang lee thing is a complete myth that has no physical grounds.

unless you can provide some survey of all those put off by the new film as a sample of the population then it really just sounds like fans of TIH being bitter.

Complete and utter nonsense, Batman Begins managed to make over $350 million WW off the back of a movie FAR more hated by the general public than Ang's movie was.

I wish TIH was making more, i really do, but the people blaming other things like the 2003 movie amoung others are just wrong. The movie hasnt performed, simple as, doesnt make it a bad movie, but it has.

 

[Chewy]

I'd be surprised if the first impression of The Hulk for most viewers wasn't Bill Bixby's series, instead of Ang Lee's movie. Which didn't open up at a pace to make $200 million, despite revisionist history, or end up all that disliked on places like IMDB.

HULK definitely opened at a pace that could have led to $200M, had it not had a 70% drop its second weekend. And it is rated equal to the first F4 movie and lower than the second on IMDB. I can't see in what world that's not a film which is disliked.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

HULK definitely opened at a pace that could have led to $200M, had it not had a 70% drop its second weekend. And it is rated equal to the first F4 movie and lower than the second on IMDB. I can't see in what world that's not a film which is disliked.

Yet plenty of people here and on other web-sites such as Empireonline.com say they love it.

 

[Chewy]

Yet plenty of people here and on other web-sites such as Empireonline.com say they love it.

I never said that some people didn't love it, but he claimed that it was a film that hadn't generated much hate on sites like IMDB, which just isn't true.

 

[Evil Twin]

Hulk opened at $63 million. The standard multiplier for final domestic box office is generally 2.5 to 3 times opening weekend box office, for a standard 3 day weekend opening. 3 times $63 million is not $200 million. Ergo: Ang Lee's Hulk didn't open on pace for $200 million. And the three time multiplier is very optimistic, 2.6 to 2.7 multipliers are much more common.

I stand by the fact that Hulk isn't hated. Disliked yes. But it's IMDB rating is 5.8 which isn't horrible. Batman and Robin, a movie that is hated, has a rating of 3.5. Batman Forever, a movie regarded as mediocre and successful financially, has a rating of 5.4. Heck, Sex and the City has a 5.3 rating but you can bet a sequel is coming.

Heck, it's not like I even like Ang Lee's Hulk. I respect Ang Lee's intentions, but intentions without accompanying realization of vision don't mean a whole lot. But I don't hate it either and think that there never can be a successful Hulk movie. I suspect that there's more than a few with that opinion. And the ones that think otherwise probably were never in for the long haul anyways.

 

[TheSlag]

What went wrong?

Several things. But at the same time, SEVERAL things went right IMO.

But it basically falls under the 800 lb. Gorilla of Summer Action Flick compromising the Storyline, when it did not have to, nor should have.

Act 1 - Greatness
Act 2 - Weaker (even though the college campus scene was MAJOR Kick Ass
Act 3 - Extrememely Weak

Act 3 was so ambiguous as to where they wanted to take it. The only thing more ambiguous to me was the overall storyline.

The final battle was almost anti-clamatic. Hulk choking/killing Abom and he stops with one simple "Stop!" by Betty???? All that Rage/Power cut off in an instant. Barely no struggle in shutting down??? No drama.

No resolution... Abom just "gave up" after being almost choked to death by Hulk??? And he has the Super Serum and Hulk contaminated blood in him and he cannot recover???

Banner is in the Jungle/Cabin near the end and appears to be Able and Wanting to Transform???? WTH????? Man on the run (GREAT Story Line) and they just throw that aside at the end for Man living in nice cabin, transforming for kicks?!?!?!?! WT Bloody Hell??????

And yet, with the missing storyline (overall), missing character development between key players, some iffy casting of some... and with ALL of this going against it... IT STILL DID SEVERAL THINGS SO RIGHT!

A mixed bag, but it still comes down to...

"The Heart Osborn.... THE HEART!!!!"

and in that case... the big green Lug was lacking.

 

[Obi Wan Kenobi]

It had a lot to do with it. It wasn't a popular film and soured a lot of people on the character. If that film was never made and this was the first hulk film, it's box office would probably be up about %50.

Yep.

 

[SFII]

i'm starting to think that maybe the General Audience isn't into seeing a CGI monster. altho, the CGI Hulk in Ang Lee's movie looked pretty cool to me, yet ofcourse at times looked cartoony. i liked the CGI Hulk in the new movie better. he just seemed to move better, and looked more a bit more "realistic" to me.
i personally have no problem with the CGI Hulk in either film, but like i said, people will still complain about it.
so, maybe Marvel should try putting some green makeup back on Lou Ferigno again.

 

[dark_b]

What went wrong?

Several things. But at the same time, SEVERAL things went right IMO.

But it basically falls under the 800 lb. Gorilla of Summer Action Flick compromising the Storyline, when it did not have to, nor should have.

Act 1 - Greatness
Act 2 - Weaker (even though the college campus scene was MAJOR Kick Ass
Act 3 - Extrememely Weak

Act 3 was so ambiguous as to where they wanted to take it. The only thing more ambiguous to me was the overall storyline.

The final battle was almost anti-clamatic. Hulk choking/killing Abom and he stops with one simple "Stop!" by Betty???? All that Rage/Power cut off in an instant. Barely no struggle in shutting down??? No drama.

No resolution... Abom just "gave up" after being almost choked to death by Hulk??? And he has the Super Serum and Hulk contaminated blood in him and he cannot recover???

Banner is in the Jungle/Cabin near the end and appears to be Able and Wanting to Transform???? WTH????? Man on the run (GREAT Story Line) and they just throw that aside at the end for Man living in nice cabin, transforming for kicks?!?!?!?! WT Bloody Hell??????

And yet, with the missing storyline (overall), missing character development between key players, some iffy casting of some... and with ALL of this going against it... IT STILL DID SEVERAL THINGS SO RIGHT!

A mixed bag, but it still comes down to...

"The Heart Osborn.... THE HEART!!!!"

and in that case... the big green Lug was lacking.

they showed that Banner is able to control now the transformation.
so he is ablle to transform when he wants and IMO at the same imte he can transform back to Banner again.
if he can control it then he will not change again in the supermarket.
so no more hulk-outs in the future.

 

[dark_b]

i'm starting to think that maybe the General Audience isn't into seeing a CGI monster. altho, the CGI Hulk in Ang Lee's movie looked pretty cool to me, yet ofcourse at times looked cartoony. i liked the CGI Hulk in the new movie better. he just seemed to move better, and looked more a bit more "realistic" to me.
i personally have no problem with the CGI Hulk in either film, but like i said, people will still complain about it.
so, maybe Marvel should try putting some green makeup back on Lou Ferigno again.

i am now only waitiing for someone to writte ''people like big mechanical monsters...but they dont like living green monsters''.

TF. plain and simple. TF is you proof that GP will eat big fights.

 

[November Rain]

well, it's kindof a lose-lose situation for Marvel.
the first "lose":
Ang Lee's movie DID have an affect on the new movie. Ang's movie wasn't one of those "wow, i gotta go see it" type of movies. his movie was a little bit too deep and too serious-toned. perhaps the plot just wasn't that good. but there was a lot of hype. people went to go see it the first weekend. and then it dropped off. so, Ang's movie did leave a bad taste in people's mouths, and a "sequel" wouldn't do much to draw them back in. and TIH is feeling the consequences of it.
and the second "lose":
for TIH, if you call it a "reboot", people will be like "been there, done that".

Not really, we live in a current day society where remakes are made all the time of all things and the new ones are seen without any kinda prejudice to see how it compared to the old one.

heck, I bet they got an extra batch of people watching this one who didn't like the first one to see if it's any better.

The reason for the drop off was because the film was mis-advertised as an all out no holds barred action flick. People complain about how long it takes to see the hulk but watch supeman the movie, superman returns, batman begins and spiderman, they all take roughly about the same time (some even longer) to see the main character. King kong takes about an hour before you actually see the beast at least.

I've not heard anyone put off by this one because of the first one. I do however know of plenty of people put off both because of a cgi hulk but that is another debate entirely and is not a fault of ang's interpretation influencing this one.

 

[November Rain]

i am now only waitiing for someone to writte ''people like big mechanical monsters...but they dont like living green monsters''.

TF. plain and simple. TF is you proof that GP will eat big fights.

Transformers aren't humanoid forms or meant to originate from real life actors. Plus they are cooler as a collective than the hulk.

 

[November Rain]

THIS is nonsense. Bond, much like Batman before him, has a history of some beloved films (Dr. No, Goldfinger, etc) with a few stinkers sprinkled in. There may be the occasional poor movie, but his film history has bought enough goodwill with film goers that the producers can move on with a good film without worry that the one film will sour the franchise forever. Hulk, on the other hand, had a very disliked movie right out of the gates, souring the franchise for future installments.

Er, the Hulk has a history of a well loved tv series which was loved by the mainstream audience. what you are saying is a comparison of apples and oranges.

The average movie goer is completely unaffected by ang's interpretation and if anyone felt it was a sequel, then that's the fault of the marketing people for not making it clear, not ang's fault.

Bats' reputation had started going sour from batman forever and bond's had started pretty much from tomorrow never dies (goldeneye being the only pierce brosnan bond film to get any decent credit).

People are generally more forgiving than you may realise if they feel a connection to a franchise. No matter how bad a knight rider movie that comes out today is, if another comes out 3 months later, it'll have no effect on the average knight rider fan of the series or general public.

now the public don't like milking a franchise over a short period of time (like two matrix films in a short period of time) but five years is more than enough time to bury the hatchet especially with a reboot.

ultimately you have no proof ang lee had any effect and you're just trying to point the finger. it's not justified or particularly fair. While you are there, why not blame the comic materials, the tv show, the cartoon(s) and everything else hulk related that came out before the film because they must have just as much influence as ang lee's film did.

 

[F91]

Question: What went wrong?
Answer: The CGI was bad enough to turn off the general movie going audience.