TIH vs. Ang Lee's Hulk

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Fair enough, haha, I doubt things would work like that in, let's say, a religious brainwashing cult, where you have a cult leader who everyone follows unquestioningly.

Ha ha true, but then i doubt we'll ever get that in a Hulk movie!

Its always going to be the army, unless they do things like Future Imperfect or Planet Hulk of course!

 

[soundofyousick]

I haven't read any of those books, I would have checked out Planet Hulk, but money woes are mine like Banner, I need my dough for shirts.
The last Hulk comic I bought was 'Ultimate Wolverine vs Hulk', he is not one of the characters I have been concerned with buying comics of particularly, but I wish I had bought some more over the years.

 

[Hmarrs]

I was referring to the convo where someone asked you why you were posting with such strange paragraphs, not much punctuation, and lots of mis-spelling, and you answered that you were posting from your phone.
So, I posed the question whether you could *only* post from your phone in the manner of a 'Hulk'-based joke. ie whether you were on the road all the time like Banner.

bum has one 'm' btw. unless of course, you have a big bumm.

I know what you meant I was just joking.
I am always on the run.
(He says as piano Hulk music plays in the background).
My Phone that's another issue altogether.
Sorry about that.

You do know what the word 'reason' means, don't you? A *real* leader needs to be reasonable, and realise they can be wrong sometimes, this is why they have advisors. You know, like a *real* person, and not someone who acts like a cold calculating robot.

What's the deal with everyone questioning whether or not people understand the meaning of words just becuase you don't agree with them.
Just because I say I don't feel SE was unreasonable how does that consist of me not knowing what reasonable means???
Who said SE Ross was a good leader?
In the comics Ross never listened to reason he was driven to the point of maddness in one issue,his demise in another.
He was not a good leader that's why in the comics he was the bad guy and Hulk was actually the good guy.
The original premise of the Hulk issues was that Hulk was a Monster on the outside and Ross was a monster on the inside.

 

[soundofyousick]

What's the deal with everyone questioning whether or not people understand the meaning of words just becuase you don't agree with them.
Just because I say I don't feel SE was unreasonable how does that consist of me not knowing what reasonable means???
Who said SE Ross was a good leader?
In the comics Ross never listened to reason he was driven to the point of maddness in one issue,his demise in another.
He was not a good leader that's why in the comics he was the bad guy and Hulk was actually the good guy.
The original premise of the Hulk issues was that Hulk was a Monster on the outside and Ross was a monster on the inside.

You did! You said that because Ross didn't listen to anyone else that he was a 'general', ie that made him a leader.
So, I wondered why you thought that made him 'reasonable', I was perplexed as to why someone would think that was a reasonable thing for a leader to do, leaders must listen to other people in case they are wrong.
If he had listened to Betty, and treated Bruce like a human being, as opposed to a 'thing', then a lot of damage could have been avoided.

 

[Hmarrs]

You did! You said that because Ross didn't listen to anyone else that he was a 'general', ie that made him a leader.
So, I wondered why you thought that made him 'reasonable', I was perplexed as to why someone would think that was a reasonable thing for a leader to do, leaders must listen to other people in case they are wrong.
If he had listened to Betty, and treated Bruce like a human being, as opposed to a 'thing', then a lot of damage could have been avoided.

Yes but you almost make it seem asif all leaders do listen when in fact many are unreasonable.

Listening does not make you a Leader it can determine whether you a good leader or a bad one.

Ok let's backtrack.
When I say leader I mean he was in a leadership postion.
That does not mean he was a good leader.
Then I said to be a good leader especially a General one must not be undecisive or swayed by emotions.

This is true however you can be so driven by what you feel is the right thing as a good leader that you become unreasonable.
Thus being the case here he was moved by hate,anger,and blind ambition.

In HIS MIND he felt he was doing the right thing and that he was a good leader.

I felt that SE really felt he was doing what he needed to do as a General and as a Father.In his mind.

However I felt WH knew he was doing wrong but didn't care.

I guess at this point a case can be made either way as a more accurate Ross.

 

[soundofyousick]

Ok let's backtrack.
When I say leader I mean he was in a leadership postion.
That does not mean he was a good leader.
then I said to be a good leader especially a General one must not be undecisive or swayed by emotions.

I'm sorry, but I am not convinced that you originally meant that, why would you take the trouble to reply to me to tell me something so startingly obvious? Of course he was in the leadership position.

The way you put it was that what made him a leader was that he didn't listen to anyone.

I don't know, the trouble is Hmarrs, you sometimes talk in clipped sentences, so perhaps your meaning was lost in that post.

This is true however you can be so driven by what you feel is the right thing as a good leader that you become unreasonable.
Thus being the case here he was moved by hate,anger,and blind ambition.

In HIS MIND he felt he was doing the right thing and that he was a good leader.

I felt that SE really felt he was doing what he needed to do as a General and as a Father.In his mind.

Well then, such a 'leader' is not what I would call an intelligent person, but he was smart, so I can only ascertain that he didn't give a crap, and cared only about his agenda to destroy the Hulk at any cost.

However I felt WH knew he was doing wrong but didn't care.

I guess at this point a case can be made either way as a more accurate Ross.

I got the sense that the WH character went through a change at the end of the film, where he finally became convinced that the Hulk was not as out of control as he thought, and could be used for good against the Abomination. There is the scene where Norton takes the time to convince him, so it did feel like WH changed his mind, ie listened to someone else's opposing argument, that is what I got from the scene anyway.

 

[Cracker Jack]

Ha ha true, but then i doubt we'll ever get that in a Hulk movie!

Its always going to be the army, unless they do things like Future Imperfect or Planet Hulk of course!

WOW!!! this reminds me of a thread I use to peruse a long time ago, in a galaxy far far away. How it hanging Jamon. Good to see you old friend.

This might surprise you but as far as a movie goes, from strictly a movie standpoint goes HULK was better then TIH. However, since the Avengers Neither are watchable. Happy New Year Jamon.

 

[Hmarrs]

I'm sorry, but I am not convinced that you originally meant that, why would you take the trouble to reply to me to tell me something so startingly obvious? Of course he was in the leadership position.

The way you put it was that what made him a leader was that he didn't listen to anyone.

I don't know, the trouble is Hmarrs, you sometimes talk in clipped sentences, so perhaps your meaning was lost in that post.

Just becuase I say he shouldn't be swayed by emotion does not mean that I think it's okay for him to be unreasonable.
That's what you assumed I said.
I'm just saying he cannot be undesicive.
I did however say that by all cost SE was unreasonable but in his mind he felt he was doing the right thing therefore he felt he was being reasonable and that everyone else was not.
It's called making a mistake.
This is SE I'm talking about which made me think more of the comic book Hulk.
WH being more reasonable did not harken to me the Ross from the comic as he was never reasonable.[/QUOTE]

Well then, such a 'leader' is not what I would call an intelligent person, but he was smart, so I can only ascertain that he didn't give a crap, and cared only about his agenda to destroy the Hulk at any cost.

Exactly my point that was how he was depicted in the comics.

I got the sense that the WH character went through a change at the end of the film, where he finally became convinced that the Hulk was not as out of control as he thought, and could be used for good against the Abomination. There is the scene where Norton takes the time to convince him, so it did feel like WH changed his mind, ie listened to someone else's opposing argument, that is what I got from the scene anyway.

I agree wholeheartly that's not my argument.
I just feel the comic book Ross would have never done that or rarely so.
That's why I felt SE was more accurate.

 

[soundofyousick]

Just becuase I say he shouldn't be swayed by emotion does not mean that I think it's okay for him to be unreasonable.
That's what you assumed I said.
I'm just saying he cannot be undesicive.
I did however say that by all cost SE was unreasonable but in his mind he felt he was doing the right thing therefore he felt he was being reasonable and that everyone else was not.
It's called making a mistake.

I am just going by what you chose to reply to, in an attempt to counter my opinion, and what you said. If you had agreed, then it is a simple thing to say you agreed, you did not say that, so I have to assume you are trying to counter my opinion, and take your meaning from there.

Of course a leader has to be decisive, I think what has happened, is that you have misunderstood my point.

There is a difference between listening to someone's opposing opinion, respecting it, and deciding they are wrong, *and* what I was saying, that he seemed like the type not to listen, where it doesn't matter what they say, his mind is closed on the matter, eg I don't think he listened to his own daughter when it came to Bruce.

This is SE I'm talking about which made me think more of the comic book Hulk.
WH being more reasonable did not harken to me the Ross from the comic as he was never reasonable.
Exactly my point that was how he was depicted in the comics.



I agree wholeheartly that's not my argument.
I just feel the comic book Ross would have never done that or rarely so.
That's why I felt SE was more accurate.

But I was not talking about comic book faithfulness anymore, just dealing with what we see in the films. I was responding to your statement that William Hurt knew what he was doing was wrong but didn't care. I was contering that opinion by saying he seemed like a man who was convinced by another to change his opinion on the Hulk at the end of the movie, so he must've thought what he was doing was right before that point, if indeed he had an attitude to change over from.

 

[Hmarrs]

I am just going by what you chose to reply to, in an attempt to counter my opinion, and what you said. If you had agreed, then it is a simple thing to say you agreed, you did not say that, so I have to assume you are trying to counter my opinion, and take your meaning from there.

That was your mistake don't assume you don't have to assume that.A person can offer an opinion and not be countering anothers just another perspective on the same thing.That what these boards are for.However many times I think people view them as personal attacks.Then they start name calling or questioning whether or not you know the meaning of certain words and such.In my opinion they shouldn't be on here at all.
I'm not saying you.

Of course a leader has to be decisive, I think what has happened, is that you have misunderstood my point.

There is a difference between listening to someone's opposing opinion, and deciding they are wrong,

I never said you were wrong.You assumed that.No one can say anothers opinion is wrong that's why their called opinions and everyone is entitled to one.You can agree with someone but still see things froma different perspective and I was trying to get you to see mine.The only thing I disagreed with was who I felt was a more accurate Ross based on his actions and or purpose.

*and* what I was saying, that he seemed like the type not to listen, where it doesn't matter what they say, his mind is closed on the matter, eg I don't think he listened to his own daughter when it came to Bruce.

Okay I did listen to you.I feel your not listening to me.
When you made that statement from the very beggining I said that's what makes SE more like a real life general.

But I was not talking about comic book faithfulness anymore, just dealing with what we see in the films. I was responding to your statement that William Hurt knew what he was doing was wrong but didn't care. I was contering that opinion by saying he seemed like a man who was convinced by another to change his opinion on the Hulk at the end of the movie, so he must've thought what he was doing was right before that point, if indeed he had an attitude to change over from.

No you were talking about performances in movies as to how which one seemed more accurate to real life.I started by saying SE more so then WH.If it were a real life situation because I believe more Generals would have been more stuborn as he was.Then willing to hear someone view(His Daughter with compassion or just leave him alone) on how to handle a Monster Machine like Hulk.
Most real life Generals must look after the safety of an opposing threat on the United States.If the Hulk really existed they would most likely hit first and ask qeustions later.

Then I said which makes me think of the Comic book version.Which in my opinion was portrayed more so in this likeness as well.
(Read Back)

 

[soundofyousick]

Ok, fair enough on the last point about the character being more 'realistic', both can be seen as realistic portrayals of people, but this is the first time you have brought up that phrase during the discussion since I made it last night.

As for the rest of the discussion, eh, I think there is far too much of a tangled web of knots to sift through there.

the thing is Hmarrs, sometimes you do talk in clipped sentences, and do not make your meaning clear, so I assume you are assuming I am intelligent enough to read your meaning instead of you spelling it out simply. When, what seems to be happening is the opposite, you are not expressing your opinion clearly enough, whether that is because you are posting from a phone or what, I don't know.
Sometimes you are clear, but sometimes your sentences *are* clipped and your meaning is not clear enough.

 

[Hmarrs]

Ok, fair enough on the last point about the character being more 'realistic', both can be seen as realistic portrayals of people, but this is the first time you have brought up that phrase during the discussion since I made it last night.

Are you reffering to realistic?If so then here is my post from#556>"Then I have to say SE was more like a real General then WH."
If this is not what you were reffering to then please specify.

As for the rest of the discussion, eh, I think there is far too much of a tangled web of knots to sift through there.

Agreed.

the thing is Hmarrs, sometimes you do talk in clipped sentences, and do not make your meaning clear, so I assume you are assuming I am intelligent enough to read your meaning instead of you spelling it out simply. When, what seems to be happening is the opposite, you are not expressing your opinion clearly enough, whether that is because you are posting from a phone or what, I don't know.
Sometimes you are clear, but sometimes your sentences *are* clipped and your meaning is not clear enough.

Wow your assumming that I'm assumming that's twice as bad as assuming.That's definitly a recipe for trouble.
Don't assume Sound that's bad especially on a Thread where there is no inflection on words.
I apologize if at times it seems I don't come across well.I will take the heat for that.Okay but you have to take the heat for assuming.
Assuming is never good.
Just ask me to specify like I did above.

 

[soundofyousick]

Are you reffering to realistic?If so then here is my post from#556>"Then I have to say SE was more like a real General then WH."
If this is not what you were reffering to then please specify.

Well, I felt you were going into the area of speaking of what qualities a real leader should consist of, whereas I was talking about a realistic person in terms of emotional reactions, when I used the term.
I mean, I know that's what you were talking about at first, given the rest of the post. So, I think you changed the goalposts of the discussion there Hmarrs.

Wow your assumming that I'm assumming that's twice as bad as assuming.That's definitly a recipe for trouble.
Don't assume Sound that's bad especially on a Thread where there is no inflection on words.
I apologize if at times it seems I don't come across well.I will take the heat for that.Okay but you have to take the heat for assuming.
Assuming is never good.
Just ask me to specify like I did above.

No, not really, there are plenty of people on message boards who coax their questions/answers in such a way as to challenge one's reading comprehension, ie they try to reveal you are stupid if you are only up to a certain level of rc. I don't think it's bad to suspect that you may be communicating like this, where you may be using the fact you talk in clipped sentences a lot of the time and do not specify what you mean, so it could be construed in two ways. (When someone maybe is too polite to ask you to be more specific, and instead interprets what you mean from context etc)
Which, could be used to your advantage if you're the type to try and make someone look stupid in a convo.
eg, You start to talk about what you feel makes a good leader, and then try and turn that into the fact you were not talking about that, but about how realistic the character was.

In fact, I think that's what you are trying to do, so this no longer feels like an honest conversation, more like a lot of 'fancy footwork' coaxed in vague questions/answers, which can be turned around in meaning whenever you feel like it.
So, this conversation is over.

 

[Hmarrs]

Well, I felt you were going into the area of speaking of what qualities a real leader should consist of, whereas I was talking about a realistic person in terms of emotional reactions, when I used the term.
I mean, I know that's what you were talking about at first, given the rest of the post. So, I think you changed the goalposts of the discussion there Hmarrs.

I could say the same about you but I'm not assuming the worst.
Like you are.
However I did speak of both issues as I proved by posting a past post#556.
I really don't know what more you want.
I said he was more realistic to me as what a Leader would do.
Also as a real person.
That's just my opinion.

No, not really, there are plenty of people on message boards who coax their questions/answers in such a way as to challenge one's reading comprehension, ie they try to reveal you are stupid if you are only up to a certain level of rc. I don't think it's bad to suspect that you may be communicating like this, when you maybe using the fact you talk in clipped sentences a lot of the time and do not specify what you mean, where it could be construed in two ways. (When someone maybe is too polite to ask you to be more specific, and instead interprets what you mean from context etc)
Which, could be used to your advantage if you the type to try and make someone look stupid in a convo.
eg, You start to talk about what you feel makes a good leader, and then try and turn that into the fact you were not talking about that, but about how realistic the character was.

In fact, I think that's what you are trying to do, so this no longer feels like an honest conversation, more like a lot of 'fancy footwork' coaxed in vague questions/answers, which can be turned around in meaning whenever you feel like it.
So, this conversation is over.

Why are you getting so upset???Your assuming again.
I feel the only one dancing here
is you.
I feel your the one who deciding what I do and don't mean by your vague assumtions.
What your saying doesn't make sense.Your saying if a person can mean somthing two ways then it's best to assume the worst???


Let me give you some advice...
When you ASS U ME.
You make an ASS of U and ME.

 

[soundofyousick]

When you ASS U ME.
You make an ASS of U and ME.

haha. good one.

edit: listen, this is all I'm gonna say...I think you are pissed at me Hmarrs, I think you are pissed at me because when I came into the thread I answered some questions that were being posed at you(the thread *had* been a bit dormant on the subject, and I felt like your viewpoint was more valid than people were giving you credit for, so I jumped into the fray to defend your p.o.v), and you are pissed because you think that I thought you weren't smart enough to defend yourself. I apologised later on when I did in fact jump in prematurely when someone asked you a certain question, only because it was trying to concflict with something i had also said. and you accepted my apology for jumping in.
So, now you are trying to make me look stupid, because your ego is bruised.

 

[Hmarrs]

haha. good one.

edit: listen, this is all I'm gonna say...I think you are pissed at me Hmarrs, I think you are pissed at me because when I came into the thread I answered some questions that were being posed at you(the thread *had* been a bit dormant on the subject, and I felt like your viewpoint was more valid than people were giving you credit for, so I jumped into the fray to defend your p.o.v), and you are pissed because you think that I thought you weren't smart enough to defend yourself. I apologised later on when I did in fact jump in prematurely when someone asked you a certain question, only because it was trying to concflict with something i had also said. and you accepted my apology for jumping in.
So, now you are trying to make me look stupid, because your ego is bruised.

Holy Smokes you got all that??Are you serious??
Boy when you assume you really assume.
I am not upset.
"Okay where's the Camera"C'mon is this really Parker Wayne busting my Chops c'mon.

This is all actually funny someone"s messing with me.I know it.
Rider is that you???

If not then Sound Dude lighten up I am not mad.
It's not that serious.

 

[soundofyousick]

Holy Smokes you got all that??Are you serious??
Boy when you assume you really assume.
I am not upset.
"Okay where's the Camera"C'mon is this really Parker Wayne busting my Chops c'mon.

This is all actually funny someone"s messing with me.I know it.
Rider is that you???

If not then Sound Dude lighten up I am not mad.
It's not that serious.

haha, that 'where's the camera, c'mon is this really...' line, excellent, you have given me a right good laugh two posts in a row man, thank you.
Let's just leave it there.

 

[Hmarrs]

Okay.

 

[Hmarrs]

I also fit Ang Lee's Hulk within the MCU. I know it's completely unofficial but it works if you omit a few things here and there. I like to pretend that Banner changes his own origin in relation to his guilt.

What do mean by"Changes his own origin?"

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

WOW!!! this reminds me of a thread I use to peruse a long time ago, in a galaxy far far away. How it hanging Jamon. Good to see you old friend.

This might surprise you but as far as a movie goes, from strictly a movie standpoint goes HULK was better then TIH. However, since the Avengers Neither are watchable. Happy New Year Jamon.

Oh I dont know, I have been able to watch Hulk since Avengers, but not TIH, but yeah, Avengers Hulk was superb and the best yet.

On another note, Happy New Year to you as well, I am fine as always, how the hell are you? Long time no type! Ha ha, hope all is well.

 

[AnneFan]

I'd take the Banner/Hulk segments from The Avengers over both these films.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

@ PARKER WAYNE
Troll : anyone who talk nonsense without researching, lack of knowledge of certain issues.
example gamers on N4G.COM no one knows the spec's on ps4 nor the 720 but gamers everyday TROLL on the site.


in layman trem : a troll is someone talking crap out of their you know what.
dont think Hamrrs doing such things.

Lol hi Hmarrs.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

@ PARKER WAYNE
is it Nessasary to attack ones opinion as you're doing to HAMRRS???? are we not ENTITLE to a opinion??
here's mine ANG LEE hulk sucks!!!!! now thats my opinion. not a rat-arse you can do about it. far as im concern ang lee hulk look like a green GIANT character from the commercial green giant. the INCREDIBLE HULK was improvement. AVENGERS hulk nailed it. until MARVEL re-design HULK facial features lets go with the flow.
personally i would chosen the 1960 Frankenstein flat top gray hulk.............
oh' by the way I AM!!! a fan.

By the way Hmarrs, I'm not a fan of the Ang Lee movie so you can stop using a second account to troll me.

 

[Hmarrs]

Lol hi Hmarrs.

By the way Hmarrs, I'm not a fan of the Ang Lee movie so you can stop using a second account to troll me.

Think for a moment.I already knew you weren't a fan.
Sorry Pwayne,
That's not me.However by the SOUND of it that's your M.O.
That just makes me sick.
I was waiting for Wayne to come back out after my last back and Forth with
Soundofyousick.
If you P.M. me Ill tell you how I figured it out.
Just so I don't have to put you on blast as well as tie up this Thread.

By the way Rider is not me but he is a good friend of mine.
We have a private group called Hmarrsriders.
You can request to be invited.Ask Avitwitjamon he's part of the group too.
You can meet him youself or would like his E-mail.

He and I been posting here for a long time and have decided to always have each others back.

We are also on BiblebeliveingHolyGhostreciveing
Ill send you an invite.
Apart from everything Wayne I feel your quite an intellect but its also your downfall.

 

[Doc Ock]

I agree, both Rosses were handled better in the first movie.

I do think think General Ross was better in Lee's Hulk but I think Betty was much better in TIH, because I felt more like Bruce and Betty actually loved each other. Which is a very important part of the story of Bruce Banner IMO.

I love Ang Lee's Hulk and the approach he took and that it Nolan before Nolan.

Also like Nolan films,people were upset w/the lack of action (or kind of action).

What made y change your mind on Ang Lee's Hulk?

With time and multiple viewings I eventually came to realize its a somewhat intelligent film really delving into the mind of Banner/Hulk and I think both Hulk and TIH are excellent Hulk films in different ways. I still prefer TIH over Hulk though. Time can usually have a positive effect on a film I disliked. Such as Spider-Man 3 which I used to hate among my first viewing but now love.