The Avengers The Official 'Hulk in Avengers' thread. - Part 1

[Iceman]

That's unfortunate because I do.

Not unfortunate, it's fine mate! t: Just what we individually see onscreen, no prob.

 

[Khemik@L]

Did anyone else notice that in the scene in the Captain America movie where Steve Rogers gets the Super Soldier Serum pumped in him while laying in the machine, he makes a similar expression with the eyes that Norton's Banner makes when he changes to Hulk on Sterns' lab table? It gave me chills.

I've been saying this since the trailer

 

[ArtTeacher]

I'm sorry, but this Hulk design is probably the best comic book to movie look I have ever seen. I am in awe at how perfect the classic 60's hulk translated to real life.

And I think it's weird to have a 60's Hulk with a modern-day Iron Man, Thor, Cap, etc. Who would want to see Iron Man go to his original boxy, gold armor for the entire Avengers movie? Seems like a step backward.

 

[Matt Mortem]

And I think it's weird to have a 60's Hulk with a modern-day Iron Man, Thor, Cap, etc. Who would want to see Iron Man go to his original boxy, gold armor for the entire Avengers movie? Seems like a step backward.

There's nothing about the design that screams 60's though. Iron Man's gold armor would look all kinds of antiquated, but this Hulk is kind of timeless. He's referred to as 60's Hulk simply because that's when that design was made. That design works just as well in modern times IMO

 

[Gamma Goliath]

Hmm...hulk is timeless some would say TIH resembled the 70's Hulk, put just about any design in any era and it holds up IMO. Iron man and the others are different.

 

[NickNitro]

Obviously Mechanical Armor designs from the 60's will look a lot different then designs of the modern day. Thats like saying a Buick from the 30's wouldnt look out of place Downtown Manhattan today.

Technologically designs change and the joke about 60's hulk really doesnt apply.

A sculputre made from Da Vinci of a human body is going to look exactly the same as a sculpture made today of the human body, because?....because anatomy doesnt change. Vehicles.....automotives.......aircrafts.....these are ever changing designs...mechanical designs. The Hulk is still a creature, be it made up or not, he still has the same anatomical features as any human does today or 2 thousand years ago....

To gripe that a 60s style Hulk will look weird in todays world is just IMHO a dumb statement.

 

[ArtTeacher]

To gripe that a 60s style Hulk will look weird in todays world is just IMHO a dumb statement.

If the new Avengers banner showed Thor in an exact replica of his 1962 Journey into Mystery costume, hospitals would be overrun with fanboy cardiac arrest.

Look at how many people screamed, "No wings!" "No ears!" "No scales!" for Cap.
And that's not even his 60's costume!

A 60's Hulk looks weird to me, since I know that they're going with a 60's design amid all modern designs.

And that's ~if~ the design on the banner is what we're getting in the movie.
The Hulk shown in the action figure display at SDCC looks different (and better) than this banner.
The artwork for this banner was probably started way before the action figure corner artwork, so perhaps the figure display artwork is closer to what we'll get in the movie.

 

[NickNitro]

Then your gripe is with the design, not the fact that its from the 60's. I think the way you are arguing is at least for me confusing.

Clearly the older styles of the characters costumes are very outdated, but say the 60's version of the Hulk you dont like because of the design...not the fact that its a version of the Hulk from the 60's.

Edit: Also taking that last line out of context really makes it look out of place. I was saying it was a dumb comment because of all the statements I made prior to it. Dont make me come off like all Im doing is attacking you for no reason.

 

[ArtTeacher]

Then your gripe is with the design, not the fact that its from the 60's. I think the way you are arguing is at least for me confusing. Clearly the older styles of the characters costumes are very outdated, but say the 60's version of the Hulk you dont like because of the design...not the fact that its a version of the Hulk from the 60's.

I don't like the 1960's design.
It's a strange choice amid the modern-day design of every other character.

Edit: Also taking that last line out of context really makes it look out of place. I was saying it was a dumb comment because of all the statements I made prior to it. Dont make me come off like all Im doing is attacking you for no reason.

Out of context? Your original post is immediately above mine. This thread is the context. I'm not making you come off like you're attacking me.

 

[jadejaws]

Clearly the older styles of the characters costumes are very outdated, but say the 60's version of the Hulk you dont like because of the design...not the fact that its a version of the Hulk from the 60's.

I've just gone cross eyed

 

[JeetKuneDo]

I love the Hulk's design. NICE!!!

Same. Loving that look. Hope that's the design they go with.

Something interesting here. Since the comic Hulk has had so many looks...that means no matter what they go with in the movie...some fans will hate it. Marvel is responsible for this though. They could have insisted that artists keep the Hulk's look more consistent over the years. Iron Man artists don't come in and create a whole new look for him, do they?

Yeah, im living for the day Hulk knocks that smug smirk off of Stark's face, lol

Never thought about that before....and I like Stark's smugness, but I'm with you.

The Hulk is such a dumb character

Say that to his face, Bats.

This has been on my mind for a while now and am really wondering how The Avengers movie is going handle the Hulk.

Are we going to get a 90/10 Hulk to Banner like we do in Avengers EMH or are we going to get the 70/30 Banner to Hulk like in TIH.

With that being said, are we going to give Hulk actual lines and speak, or is he going to just be the bashing ogor that we've all come to love.

Eh? I hate the mute Hulk. I hated the TV show because of that. I hated that we finally got a Hulk movie in '03 and the Hulk was a mute guest star in his own movie with zero personality. I hated that TIH again made him into a guest star who couldn't even speak to Betty in the cave.

I've got Banner overload. Enough of him already...I'm ready for the Hulk to be onscreen for the first time.

 

[misjuevos]

im with you, been saying more hulk less banner

 

[WolfCypher]

As long as the Hulk is treated as an actual character and not just a city-destroying gorilla, I'm up for more Hulk and less Bruce.

 

[Rock Sexton]

Budgetary constraints ..... the reason why you guys will never get this eloquent side of Hulk you're pining for. Hence the heavy doses of Banner.

 

[misjuevos]

what is the budget on the avengers film, last i read it was only 40 million.

 

[Gamma Burst]

That's impossible, considering Iron Man, Thor and Cap were around 150M $.

 

[misjuevos]

i said the last time i read about it, just looking at it now it says 170 million is estimated. the lotr the two towers had a budget of 94 million and they used a cg character throughout the movie, so making a talking hulk might not be as hard as you think. especially since the two towers was made a while ago.

 

[Obi-Ron]

Rest assured that they have enough money going into The Avengers to have the Hulk do any old thing they want him to. Including talk.

 

[Rock Sexton]

i said the last time i read about it, just looking at it now it says 170 million is estimated. the lotr the two towers had a budget of 94 million and they used a cg character throughout the movie, so making a talking hulk might not be as hard as you think. especially since the two towers was made a while ago.

Well for one thing to cost to render the Hulk will be drastically different then Gollum. Secondly, didn't LOTR use an in-house company for all the VFX? WETA I believe is it.

 

[Rock Sexton]

Dunno if anyone had ever seen this .... I know I never had until a moment ago.

INCREDIBLE HULK - COMPUTER ANIMATION and MOTION-CAPTURE EPK
[YT]47G65D8tB-M [/YT]

Capturing the Incredible Hulk
[YT]VYsPw7qJAN0&NR=1[/YT]

Becoming the Abomination: The Incredible Hulk 2008 (Tim Roth sports a mocap suit in this)
[YT]wnL2NxWmHiE[/YT]

 

[misjuevos]

Well for one thing to cost to render the Hulk will be drastically different then Gollum. Secondly, didn't LOTR use an in-house company for all the VFX? WETA I believe is it.

just to clarify are you saying the cost to render the hulk will be different because of the hulk's size? if so then that is not true, the size is manipulated easily. it's just scaling. the hardest part was making gollum act and they did it, so making the hulk act can be done, he can be an actual member of the team.

as far as the budget weta still got paid. the budget was 94m and the budget for the avengers will be around 170m so it means they have more money to spend. so they have more money to make the hulk do some talking and acting, and still enough for the rest of the effects.

 

[Rock Sexton]

just to clarify are you saying the cost to render the hulk will be different because of the hulk's size? if so then that is not true, the size is manipulated easily. it's just scaling. the hardest part was making gollum act and they did it, so making the hulk act can be done, he can be an actual member of the team.

as far as the budget weta still got paid. the budget was 94m and the budget for the avengers will be around 170m so it means they have more money to spend. so they have more money to make the hulk do some talking and acting, and still enough for the rest of the effects.

You can't even begin to compare the budgets of these two movies, especially in regards to the kind of action that will be depicted in the Avengers. Just because there's gonna be like 80-100 million difference, that does not mean that's extra money all going to giving the Hulk all this screen time.

.... And yes, from what I had read the cost of rendering characters is more, the larger they get ..... specifically because of the intricacy. Gollum acting the way he did was simply Andy Serkis in a mocap suit. They also rendered his facial features.

These companies do work cheaper in-house than if it must be shipped out. WETA is a Peter Jackson company. I was reading that "Unless your software is in-house, you're paying licensing fees."

EDIT: If you really want to talk about rendering a larger character, look no further than Peter Jackon's "King Kong" .... that movie cost $207 million to make .... and that movie didn't have other super heroes who will require VFX.

 

[misjuevos]

You can't even begin to compare the budgets of these two movies, especially in regards to the kind of action that will be depicted in the Avengers. Just because there's gonna be like 80-100 million difference, that does not mean that's extra money all going to giving the Hulk all this screen time.

.... And yes, from what I had read the cost of rendering characters is more, the larger they get ..... specifically because of the intricacy. Gollum acting the way he did was simply Andy Serkis in a mocap suit. They also rendererd his facial features.

These companies do work cheaper in-house than if it must be shipped out. WETA is a Peter Jackson company. I was reading that "Unless your software is in-house, you're paying licensing fees. Otherwise, you're paying real programmers to write rendering software, as well as update it with new features or bug fixes."

to your first paragraph. i never said it was to give the hulk all this screen time, only that he can actually talk and interact with the team when needed. not just grunt at them.

to your second paragraph. they didn't paint nortan's face for nothing, it was for the same reason. ruffalo will do the same thing so why not let him go further and do some talking as well. don't need alot just something that shows the hulk is not a mindless beast.

the last paragraph. im saying the avengers budget is bigger so the hulk can do some talking/acting. the gollum reference was to show that a pure cg character could act with real people. this is what the hulk could do.

 

[Rock Sexton]

to your first paragraph. i never said it was to give the hulk all this screen time, only that he can actually talk and interact with the team when needed. not just grunt at them.

to your second paragraph. they didn't paint nortan's face for nothing, it was for the same reason. ruffalo will do the same thing so why not let him go further and do some talking as well. don't need alot just something that shows the hulk is not a mindless beast.

the last paragraph. im saying the avengers budget is bigger so the hulk can do some talking/acting. the gollum reference was to show that a pure cg character could act with real people. this is what the hulk could do.

Read my edit ..... You're not comparing apples to oranges when it comes to LOTR and The Avengers, especially as far as where the money is going to go.

King Kong is a much better comparison in terms of size of the rendered character and that movie cost double of LOTR ..... not to mention didn't have other superheros who will require VFX .... a helicarrier ... a quinjet .... the baddies that we all can assume Loki is going to conjure up with the cube .... etc etc.

I'm pretty certain Whedon will have Hulk get in a few classic quips, but we're not going to be seeing serious dialogue from him IMO. They've got to allocate for the action scenes they're gonna need him in.

 

[wobbly]

I don't mind them limiting the Hulks screentime so much. After 3 live actions efforts all doing that I'm kinda used to having more Banner than Hulk for the live action stuff. And with this film, it is to be expected in any event (other characters screentime as much as the vfx costs, etc)

But that doesn't mean they can't have him talking and being more than a grunting brute in the time they do give him.

There's no good excuse to cut such a basic part of the character out yet again, and I will mind that.