The Incredible Hulk - What went wrong?

[Hmarrs]

(Regarding to your first bolded quote) Why not?

Why become complacent about art?

I was having this discussion with a friend recently. If film is art, we should all demand the best of our artists, all the time, correct? If CGI is not serving a purpose in a particular manner or format, or artistic interpretation, why shouldn't we complain about it? Do you go into a museum and "turn off your brain" when you look at Rembrandt? Do you "turn off your brain" when you read Shakespeare or Jane Austen? Why should we have to turn off our brain in any cinema, narratively or aesthetically??

Like it or not, our brains are processing all these images that come into our head at 24fps, and shock -- horror -- the brain doesn't actually like, or even understand all of them...

I don't think many people are being picky -- they have serious, valid issues about the entertainment that they're being force-fed, and they're being honest about how they are or are not identifying consciously or psychologically with many of these CGI endeavors.

Whatever the issues with Bay's Transformers and its narrative, I'd argue ILM's work on that film is phenomenal, really recognizing the gears and inner workings of how such a creature would transform. Rhythm & Hues' work on this Hulk film --while greatly improved in the final cut vs. the initial theatrical trailer-- is nowhere near that good, and I would argue, nowhere near as convincing as ILM's work on the first Hulk.

And I'd be willing to bet that, in retrospect, in days, months, years down the line, anyone who works in the visual effects industry would tell you the same thing, if asked about it.

So maybe Rhythm & Hues didn't have the resources that ILM has, you say? Well, if I were Marvel, I'd have wanted to do everything I could to make this Hulk film superior to and more accessible to audiences than the first in every way, which includes striving for the best visual effects possible -- which is why I'm kind of stunned that they didn't do everything possible to rope in ILM or Weta for this, especially when they already had them working on Iron Man...

That's my main problem with this movie, the whole way it was treated. I just get this feeling that Marvel thought they could throw something half-cocked out there (including a drastic re-edit in the last few weeks of post), and just because it was different in look and tone than the last Hulk, it would be more successful... not so, guys, not so...

Exactly I agree.

 

[Raiden]

My question is what the heck is wrong with the source material???
The origin is the foundation.It's like a house if the foundation is weak so is the house.
I also again thought the CGI was super weak.It does not look like an eight year progression.

Ang Lee's movie was five years ago, not eight. And I think TIH's CGI is better than Lee's Hulk. Sure it wasn't perfect, but it is still better than '03 version. However, I also think that if Marvel had given the project to ILM or Weta, we might see an even better rendered Hulk.

 

[Hmarrs]

Ang Lee's movie was five years ago, not eight. And I think TIH's CGI is better than Lee's Hulk. Sure it wasn't perfect, but it is still better than '03 version. However, I also think that if Marvel had given the project to ILM or Weta, we might see an even better rendered Hulk.

Sorry five years ago.
I agree if it had been ILM or Weta especially ILM it would have been better.
I don't agee it was better than the 03 version.IMO.

 

[nightcrawler01]

What went wrong is that nobody is going to see the movie for themselves. I never let anyone make my own choices.

TIH was a badass movie, go see it now before Wanted comes out!!

 

[cabjvitu]

well Batman Begins suffered Batman & Robin even though had years to overcome that in the general consciousness about the character on film..
this Hulk movie it was pretty near to be a classic, only coz of Marvel Scissors could not make it imo.. the Box Office it´s ok, prolly not stellar, but it´s only 5 years away from Ang´s, apparently people with entertainment can make this decisions to not go back there, not with politics you know, that they go and vote the worst choice again and again..

 

[snoodmonger]

My thoughts:

Too early: They should have done Captain America this year and TiH in 2011. As long as they rebooted Hulk pre-Avengers, they would have been fine. And another 3 years would have done worlds for helping the world forget Ang's Hulk. People might say the fledgling studio needed to use its heavy-hitter stars early (like Hulk), but I think Cap is well-known (and loved) enough, he wouldn't have been a big gamble.

Zak Penn: I don't know what Marvel sees in him. His written way more bad movies than good ones. They did the right thing by hiring legit dramatic actors. They should apply the same principles when choosing writers. (Like they did with Iron Man, which got the guys who did Children of Men.)

Editing/Story: It remains to be seen whether the Norton cut really is better, but the fact is, TiH suffered from some shoddy (and very conservative editing.) I understand wanting to make sure the audience got its action fix, but you can't do that so much at the expense of story.

Timeline: I have no idea if they were capable of starting production earlier, but it seems like having it so tight with the release date hurt. IT forced them to release clips very late and with unfinished graphics. That hurt with the average movie goer, I think.

I'm very curious to see whether Marvel considers this venture a success or failure, though. They may be very happy with 250-275 million worldwide + a more positive ciritcal (and fan response). I have no idea. But I doubt we'll see another Hulk movie till after the Avengers, if at all.

 

[SFII]

why is everyone complaining about the CGI in TIH? the CGI was fine.
i think the CGI in Iron Man had some bad scenes too. in particularly whenever Tony Stark was supposedly "balancing" in the air in his garage. that looked so fake.

 

[Doc Samson]

My thoughts:

Too early: They should have done Captain America this year and TiH in 2011. As long as they rebooted Hulk pre-Avengers, they would have been fine. And another 3 years would have done worlds for helping the world forget Ang's Hulk. People might say the fledgling studio needed to use its heavy-hitter stars early (like Hulk), but I think Cap is well-known (and loved) enough, he wouldn't have been a big gamble.

Zak Penn: I don't know what Marvel sees in him. His written way more bad movies than good ones. They did the right thing by hiring legit dramatic actors. They should apply the same principles when choosing writers. (Like they did with Iron Man, which got the guys who did Children of Men.)

Editing/Story: It remains to be seen whether the Norton cut really is better, but the fact is, TiH suffered from some shoddy (and very conservative editing.) I understand wanting to make sure the audience got its action fix, but you can't do that so much at the expense of story.

Timeline: I have no idea if they were capable of starting production earlier, but it seems like having it so tight with the release date hurt. IT forced them to release clips very late and with unfinished graphics. That hurt with the average movie goer, I think.

I'm very curious to see whether Marvel considers this venture a success or failure, though. They may be very happy with 250-275 million worldwide + a more positive ciritcal (and fan response). I have no idea. But I doubt we'll see another Hulk movie till after the Avengers, if at all.

I agree with all of the above, and I also think the main character being cgi also has something to do with it. No matter how impressive it ever gets, its still not real, and I'm not sure how involved the average moviegoer can ever get with something like that. Who knows, by the time they make the Avengers movie, it may look alot better, but I just think in terms of other Superhero Movies that have fantastic acting on its side (TDK, Ironman) the Hulk loses that once Norton has to step aside for the big man to do his thing. Heath Ledger is said to have given a great performance, RDJ gave a stellar performance, Norton can only do so much with a chopped up movie full of edits & a title character that removes him from the screen, for all intents & purposes. Either that or in the illlustrious words of the Hulk, we're all just Puny Humans after all....

 

[Lord Blackbolt]

If this was Hulks first movie...everyone knows it would be a monster. But the Ang movie really did hurt it. I'm sure with DVD and cable viewing, most people will forget that old crappy movie.

 

[Lord Blackbolt]

I find hilarious that, the reason why the movie is "failing" is because of Ang Lee´s version.
Why can´t just be the movie that is not that good to begin with, it´s just a bunch of actions scenes glowed together by a lousy script and dull dialogue, even the acting was a mess from the likes of Norton, Roth and Hurt.

I disagree. I thought the acting was way better. Norton is a million times better than Bana...(who look consipated when angry IMO.) Nolte was a campy mess...and hulk poodles? With all the seriousness in that movie....the poodles just destroyed all the cred it was trying to do to turn it into a farce. he old movie was a convoluted mess...and personally I thought it was not that close to the comic at all. Not to mention the design for Angs Hulk looked like Shrek on steriods. This hulk looks much better.

 

[Sentinel X]

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.

Wow, its like we share a mind.

The release date was a big one imo, same with Narnia. These movies would've done so much better in November/December. I don't know why marvel is so afraid to release some films during Christmas?...seriously, If there is a movie that audiences seem a little iffy on release it during a time when people go to the movies but the film isn't bombarded with competition (I know TIH wouldve done great in December, its like Marvel didnt learn from FF2)

 

[TheVileOne]

I definitely believe if this was the movie released in 2003 it would be doing considerably better. But once again, the 2003 movie really tainted the view of the character for most general moviegoers. And a lot of people wanted to ignore that danger going into this movie. And that's why the marketing felt so late. Even now some people here still think its a sequel.

 

[NoirMan82]

I think the timing was a little off for this film. If it came out in August or so it would've been cool. I loved TIH and most people I know liked it too. It felt a little chopped at times, but overall it was impressive. But this is basically the Batman Begins effect all over again. BB was a stellar film that didn't exactly slay the box office due mainly to the crap taste left over from B&R. I heard people groan "Man, another one!" during the TIH trailer in Iron Man. Thats how bad Hulk 03 burned people.

Also TIH has been subject to the most unbalanced reviews of the year. Most reviews were just people ragging on the Hulk character and not the movie. Crap movies don't get ovations at the end, TIH did, showing most critics don't know dick. The biggest hurdle of all TIH had to climb was Iron Man. Now, it seems, IM is the measure of all things. It's like people were automatically rating TIH in regards to IM. TIH is just one notch below IM in my eyes, and most others.

I still think Hulk will do okay. It's already recouped it's production budget in world wide box office, everything from here on is profit for Marvel. Combine that with eventual DVD sales and TIH is for sure a successful movie.

In summary, what went wrong?

1.) Bad release date

2.) Bad Ang Lee movie

3.) Iron Man's success

I personally think there is nothing wrong with the movie itself, I'll go see it again soon, but other factors hurt what should be a box office smash.

 

[Zig-Zag Man]

The applause came from a seperate character, Tony Stark. Just grasp that for a second ... the biggest applause and reaction came at the end, when a more talented film maker's character appeared on screen. The film's CGI was bad, but so was the actual film. The plot was thinner than paper, and there was no character development. This movie was by no means memorable or good.

Ang Lee's HULK, while polarizing, was a very good film when held to the standards of experienced and knowledgeable film critics. HULK too was a successful movie in terms of grosses. But here's the thing, HULK made you remember it one way or another. Whether you loathed it, or loved it. What did THE INCREDIBLE HULK do? Nothing. It doesn't say or do anything. It had a few video game scenes that were in not so many ways a duplicate of the previous film, albeit with less meaning and depth ... but ultimately you walk away from the movie and the entire story (or lack there of) is totally forgetable. People however will always remember HULK. It inspired some reaction in people. Where as TIH just flounders as a dumb action movie that makes NO memorable moments.

 

[NoirMan82]

The applause came from a seperate character, Tony Stark. Just grasp that for a second ... the biggest applause and reaction came at the end, when a more talented film maker's character appeared on screen. The film's CGI was bad, but so was the actual film. The plot was thinner than paper, and there was no character development. This movie was by no means memorable or good.

Ang Lee's HULK, while polarizing, was a very good film when held to the standards of experienced and knowledgeable film critics. HULK too was a successful movie in terms of grosses. But here's the thing, HULK made you remember it one way or another. Whether you loathed it, or loved it. What did THE INCREDIBLE HULK do? Nothing. It doesn't say or do anything. It had a few video game scenes that were in not so many ways a duplicate of the previous film, albeit with less meaning and depth ... but ultimately you walk away from the movie and the entire story (or lack there of) is totally forgetable. People however will always remember HULK. It inspired some reaction in people. Where as TIH just flounders as a dumb action movie that makes NO memorable moments.

You're right. Thats why people left the theatre saying "man, it was awesome when he did ____!" You're opinions are your own, dude, don't make it out like people actually share your distaste for the movie. I just had a discussion with a stranger on the train last week. He thought Hulk was the most awesome movie this year. Hulk 03' polarized people. TIH gets random people in 20 minute discussions on how cool it was. 'Nuff said.

 

[jrd550]

My thoughts:

Too early: They should have done Captain America this year and TiH in 2011. As long as they rebooted Hulk pre-Avengers, they would have been fine. And another 3 years would have done worlds for helping the world forget Ang's Hulk. People might say the fledgling studio needed to use its heavy-hitter stars early (like Hulk), but I think Cap is well-known (and loved) enough, he wouldn't have been a big gamble.

Zak Penn: I don't know what Marvel sees in him. His written way more bad movies than good ones. They did the right thing by hiring legit dramatic actors. They should apply the same principles when choosing writers. (Like they did with Iron Man, which got the guys who did Children of Men.)

Editing/Story: It remains to be seen whether the Norton cut really is better, but the fact is, TiH suffered from some shoddy (and very conservative editing.) I understand wanting to make sure the audience got its action fix, but you can't do that so much at the expense of story.

Timeline: I have no idea if they were capable of starting production earlier, but it seems like having it so tight with the release date hurt. IT forced them to release clips very late and with unfinished graphics. That hurt with the average movie goer, I think.

I'm very curious to see whether Marvel considers this venture a success or failure, though. They may be very happy with 250-275 million worldwide + a more positive ciritcal (and fan response). I have no idea. But I doubt we'll see another Hulk movie till after the Avengers, if at all.

Great, great points... I think once we get the Norton cut we'll all be a bit disappointed that we didn't get that Hulk film.

 

[Zig-Zag Man]

You're right. Thats why people left the theatre saying "man, it was awesome when he did ____!" You're opinions are your own, dude, don't make it out like people actually share your distaste for the movie. I just had a discussion with a stranger on the train last week. He thought Hulk was the most awesome movie this year. Hulk 03' polarized people. TIH gets random people in 20 minute discussions on how cool it was. 'Nuff said.

Which proves my point exactly on how current audiences and much of the fan base are total idiots. I'm not speaking for any masses, just for myself. You seem to be speaking in some factual language that TIH is a better movie than HULK, which couldn't be further from the truth.

It's funny, your 12 year old brain may have got off on all the action. You could've had a circle jerk with your friends in the theatre for all I care. Fact is, there is little to the movie and it doesn't mean, say, or do anything worth while. I damn near fell asleep on the movie in my second viewing. And the most intelligent, and best movie mind on these boards fell asleep during TIH. Why? Because it's trying to cater to young teenage boys, and skips any sort of character development, acting, and story arcs. It's a PS3 video game that has a few connecting scenes that don't mean anything other than to get you to the next action sequence.

Especially when Ang Lee's film graps the concepts of the Hulk mythos appropriately, and all TIH is for is a few action scenes that are duplicates and even lesser versions of a movie that had already been made. It is virtually less spectacular in every way. That's why most so called "fans" don't even know what they're talking about. Ang Lee understood the depths of the character, and the intelligence behind it. LL reduced some peoples favorite character to a vague cartoon character, both literally and figuratively. The CGI was Xbox 360 caliber for most of th emovie. Where as ILM created a more believable living, breathing HULK ... 5 YEARS AGO!!! TIH's cgi is a regression in comparison.

 

[Chewy]

And the most intelligent, and best movie mind on these boards fell asleep during TIH.

I can't even comprehend the ego it takes for someone to type that.

 

[NoirMan82]

Which proves my point exactly on how current audiences and much of the fan base are total idiots. I'm not speaking for any masses, just for myself. You seem to be speaking in some factual language that TIH is a better movie than HULK, which couldn't be further from the truth.

It's funny, your 12 year old brain may have got off on all the action. You could've had a circle jerk with your friends in the theatre for all I care. Fact is, there is little to the movie and it doesn't mean, say, or do anything worth while. I damn near fell asleep on the movie in my second viewing. And the most intelligent, and best movie mind on these boards fell asleep during TIH. Why? Because it's trying to cater to young teenage boys, and skips any sort of character development, acting, and story arcs. It's a PS3 video game that has a few connecting scenes that don't mean anything other than to get you to the next action sequence.

Especially when Ang Lee's film graps the concepts of the Hulk mythos appropriately, and all TIH is for is a few action scenes that are duplicates and even lesser versions of a movie that had already been made. It is virtually less spectacular in every way. That's why most so called "fans" don't even know what they're talking about. Ang Lee understood the depths of the character, and the intelligence behind it. LL reduced some peoples favorite character to a vague cartoon character, both literally and figuratively. The CGI was Xbox 360 caliber for most of th emovie. Where as ILM created a more believable living, breathing HULK ... 5 YEARS AGO!!! TIH's cgi is a regression in comparison.

Everytime you post something new, a rush of hot air billows from my screen.

 

[Zig-Zag Man]

I can't even comprehend the ego it takes for someone to type that.

I was actually referring to "The Guard" ... not myself. I didn't clarify.

 

[Zig-Zag Man]

Everytime you post something new, a rush of hot air billows from my screen.

It's like that for people without a muscle between their temples. Maybe that's why Ang Lee's HULK went right over your head.

 

[SFII]

the Ang Lee movie really did have a negative affect on TIH.
think of it like this... If DareDevil 2 came out, would you go see it?

 

[Chewy]

I was actually referring to "The Guard" ... not myself. I didn't clarify.

Oh, my mistake. I wasn't aware The Guard was "the best movie mind on these boards", though. You think maybe you just looked for someone whose opinion matched up with yours? I do.

PS: 18 out of about 300 people rated TIH at 5/10 or less on these boards. You may take your opinion as fact, but your posts are kind of a joke when you act as though other people's opinions are invalid.

 

[Zig-Zag Man]

Oh, my mistake. I wasn't aware The Guard was "the best movie mind on these boards", though. You think maybe you just looked for someone whose opinion matched up with yours? I do.

You can think what you'd like. What did you think I just searched in a short amount of time to find an opinion that matched mine? haha

And yes, The Guard is probably the best movie mind on these boards. And has been around since the begining, and knows more of what he's talking about than virtually everyone here.

but your posts are kind of a joke when you act as though other people's opinions are invalid.

I didn't say anyone's opinion wasn't valid. I find it convienent you can adrdress me on a topic like this and not comment on NoirMan82's similar comments and attempts to squash other people's opinions. I never went to the extents he did ... I never said anyone who thinks TIH is better than HULK needs psychiatric help, now did I? Do your homework first, brosef.

 

[L0ngsh0t]

In the tradition of the Box Office Mojo Forums .

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 don't know if I believe there was a whole lot wrong with this movie, at least the movie itself.

I think the marketing came in too late, it should have been on top of its game like Iron Man, but who is to say that would have helped

look the movie made 55 million in its first week which is pretty consistent with what a movie in the 130's budget generally need to make to make money. The movie is doing well internationally not dropping off very much, and holding a strong second place in an over crowded weekend.

The problem is 2003 really, if this would have been the first Hulk movie released this movie would easily get to 200 million dollars.

Next weekend will be interesting to see Wanted comes out which is an action movie junkies dream, however it doesn't necessarily negate those who may go see the Hulk considering it is PG-13 vs R.

If Hulk can get some legs under it, it could easily get too 140 and be considered a mild hit and hopefully market the sequel properly like TDK