TIH vs. Ang Lee's Hulk

[CConn]

I'm excited about The Avengers, Spider-Man, and TDKR, but I can still spare enough brain cells to talk about Hulk movies too.

 

[The Morningstar]

Listening to Burton's score, it's one of the only true "themes" i've heard for a superhero movie. Considering how many superhero movies there are, they isn't that many truly iconic scores that fit the character perfectly. I think Burton's Batman, Spidey and Hulk themes do.

Out of the hundreds of superhero movies, the only true themes i'd say are Williams' Superman, the aforementioned Burton ones, possibly Zimmer's Batman one and i'd throw Thor's one in there too.

Strange really. I hope Silvestri gives us a true, hummable superhero theme for Avengers.

 

[Captain Marvel]

The Incredible Hulk was a great movie which I can rewatch all the time. Ang Lee's Hulk, however, was an atrocious pile of steaming crap that I would've walked out on if I hadn't dragged my family to go see it for my birthday. I had to apologize profusely to all of them afterwards as they all hated the movie as well.

Is it just me, or does it seem like the people who vote for Hulk give these detailed explainations, highlighting the strengths of acting, cinematography, etc.

While the people who vote for TIH mainly just say they liked the action, or just hated Hulk enough go like TIH more.

It's not really a glowing endorsement for the film.

More like the people who like Ang Lee's Hulk feel the need to justify their opinon because, deep down, they know they like a giant steaming turd. That they're hanging their hat on the cinematography of all things kind of proves that. As for the acting, the performances were pretty stiff and monotone all across the board with the exception of Sam Elliott and Nick Nolte (who looked like he was stoned the whole time). As for other criticisms?

1) The scene where Banner is irradiated had to be one of the most boring origin scenes ever. It barely registered to me that, hey, he just became the Hulk.
2) The repetition with the scene of Banner's father going into the room with his mother was tiresome.
3) Why'd they separate the gamma bomb explosion from the origin? If you're going to have the gamma bomb going off in the movie, then make that the origin. Don't give us that dull frog scene.
4) Hulk Poodles. 'Nuff said.
5) The movie was offensively boring until the desert scene. I kept hoping and praying that something interesting would happen, and just when I thought something interesting might happen, the movie disappointed me yet again.
6) The movie ended with Nick Nolte on a cocaine induced rant.
7) The final fight scene with Absorbing Man was so dark that I didn't have a clue what was going on.
8) They needlessly complicated Banner's origin with the whole adoption and name change and just wasted time on more wooden acting.
9) Talbot's death was comically embarassing. That was the only laugh that was elicited from the crowd in the theatre that I was in, and I'm certain that that was unintentional on Ang Lee's part.
10) The comic panel framing that Ang Lee did was horrendously distracting. 24, a tv show, handled that sort of thing much more smoothly than this film.

The only redeeming quality this movie had was Sam Elliott, that was it. Everything else was absolutely terrible, including Bana and Connelly, who were stiffer than a pair of plywood boards and about as emotive.

But hey, at least it had great cinematography...

 

[The Morningstar]

No, the fans of Hulk go into detail because they have stuff to talk about besides "But Hulk fought Abomination!"

 

[BigThor]

Just because TIH wasn't as deep or introspective as HULK doesn't mean it didn't have it's moments like Betty and Hulk's cave scene or Banner continuously failing at finding a cure.

I understand that it's some people that like psychological aspect of HULK but that doesn't mean that everyone does and people have different qualifications of what they consider a good movie.

 

[The Morningstar]

Of course. It's all opinion at the end of the day.

But for me, delving into the psychological side of Banner/Hulk is essential otherwise I find Hulk incredibly boring and shallow.

 

[CConn]

I'm not trying to insult anyone's opinion or anything, I just wish I could illicit a detailed explainations of why TIH is so good according to the people who voted for it.

I mean, Captain Marvel there can recite in great detail why Hulk is bad, but can't say beyond a sentence why TIH is so good.

I just don't get it. I think I could more successfully summerize what makes TIH a good movie. And I didn't even vote for it.

 

[The Morningstar]

What i liked about TIH was the opening third when Banner is in Brazil. Him trying to find the cure, working in the plant, the way he gets found out is pretty cool and it's one of Stan Lee's better cameos.

I also really, really liked Roth and his character. I like how he becomes obsessed with the Hulk and the movie is his origin story, so to speak. Even though i don't really like Hurt's Ross I thought the scenes with him and Roth's Blonsky were really good. The whole "if i knew what i know now, but was in a younger fitter body" thing was a cool angle for Blonsky. Then he seems to actually become addicted to the serum, getting the sweats and shivers at the end before he becomes A-Bomb.

I also think the integration of SHIELD was well done. It made sense and wasn't too intrusive like it was in IM2.

 

[Captain Marvel]

I'm not trying to insult anyone's opinion or anything, I just wish I could illicit a detailed explainations of why TIH is so good according to the people who voted for it.

I mean, Captain Marvel there can recite in great detail why Hulk is bad, but can't say beyond a sentence why TIH is so good.

I just don't get it. I think I could more successfully summerize what makes TIH a good movie. And I didn't even vote for it.

I can, and would've, but I was pressed for time. But sure, I'll stop and go into it.

1) Edward Norton and Liv Tyler weren't hunks of plywood. I thought they did a much better job than their counterparts, particularly Norton with his loneliness at having to live as he did. And when they met there was some actual *gasp* passion.
2) I liked the idea that Banner was working for General Ross and, unbeknownst to him, was working on something for application in a super-soldier project.
3) I liked seeing Bruce working on different ways to cure himself.
4) Both Bruce and Betty apparently moving on with their lives, albeit Betty more successfully, as Bruce had to run from town after he Hulked out.
5) Tim Roth. The man's a fantastic actor and made for a great villain Pre-Abomination.
6) The movie was actually EXCITING. It maintained a steady pace and even balance between the action and the quiet scenes, which Ang Lee's movie failed miserably at. And when the action did happen, two-thirds of it didn't occur in pitch black against a nebulous foe or against gamma irradiated dogs. There was plenty of action and it served the story.
7) And yes, the Hulk Vs. Abomination fight was great. It was certainly a lot better than the Hulk Vs. Absorbing Man fight from the Ang Lee movie.

Is this list as long as the Ang Lee one? Nope. But the Ang Lee one is so long because it just had so many stupid things to comment on, like the Hulk dogs, Nick Nolte's cocaine induced rant at the end, the horrific comic panelling filming which was just tremendously distracting, and more besides. In the end it's easier to comment on things that don't work than things that do. And The Incredible Hulk worked, whereas Ang Lee's Hulk was a colossal failure.

 

[The Morningstar]

I thought the comic panelling worked well in some cases. Like the scene where Banner first meets Talbot, it shows Banner's, Talbot's and Betty's faces after the confrontation, showing each characters differing feelings.

I think Ang became a bit too self indulgent with it though.

The Gamma dogs was inspired by the comics.

And i liked the final fight. The way he defeats his dad showed Hulk's rage fuels his power and makes him stronger, but without just having him beat the crap out of someone. It was more creative. Plus it did have some cool imagery, like Hulk being dragged through the sky by the lightning and him picking up that absolutely huge rock, a great strength feat.

 

[Captain Marvel]

Hmm, I have more to add to the list.

8) Bruce working to control his rage, and taking that class with the guy who slapped him.
9) The truncated origin story in the first few minutes. I thought it was a great idea, as it gave the audience pretty much all they needed to know while getting to the story that most people want to see, which is Bruce Banner on the run.
10) I vastly prefered the Hulk CGI from TIH. The Ang Lee one looked way too clean and cartoonish.
11) Bruce actively trying to use the Hulk to stop a villain.
12) The movie ending with the apparent idea that Bruce has begun to take some sort of control over the Hulk, which would be nice, as I'd like a talking Hulk.

 

[Captain Marvel]

I thought the comic panelling worked well in some cases. Like the scene where Banner first meets Talbot, it shows Banner's, Talbot's and Betty's faces after the confrontation, showing each characters differing feelings.

I think Ang became a bit too self indulgent with it though.

That's putting it mildly.

The Gamma dogs was inspired by the comics.

Plenty of bad ideas have been put forward in the comics. They don't cease to be bad ideas just because they're translated to film.

And i liked the final fight. The way he defeats his dad showed Hulk's rage fuels his power and makes him stronger, but without just having him beat the crap out of someone. It was more creative. Plus it did have some cool imagery, like Hulk being dragged through the sky by the lightning and him picking up that absolutely huge rock, a great strength feat.

To each their own, but it was so dark that I couldn't even tell what was going on. And ultimately the villain was, what? A gaseous cloud? I had enough of that with Star Trek V, Fantastic Four 2, and now Green Lantern.

Moreover, creative or not, I thought the ending to TIH was far more meaningful in that the Hulk was so enraged he was going to strangle the Abomination to death, but after Betty's reaction, the Hulk made the concious decision that he didn't want to kill. I found Bruce's attempt to use the Hulk for a heroic end and for the Hulk to fully transition to the role of a hero (even if he's still considered a monster by the world) to be far more interesting than the bad guy sucking up too much gamma radiation and dying, or whatever it was that happened in the Ang Lee movie (Like I said, I have no clue what happened. I downloaded it, though, so I guess I'll rewatch that scene).

 

[elgaz]

My single biggest gripe about Ang Lee's film was the Hulk himself - how he looked.

If the Hulk had looked right, I could see past wooden performances (you get at least 1 in most films nowadays) ............... I could see past dodgy comic-style windows, hulk poodles, a weak ending, questionable exposition, and many other things which irked me.

But the minute I saw the Hulk in the film, I just didn't like their rendering of him. He looked bloated, fat at times, awkward, and badly coloured too.

And then there were these scenes. With facial expressions like this, I just couldn't take him seriously as being dangerous. He looked sad, dejected, lost, innocent, wide-eyed ............. like a scolded 5yr old in a huge bodybuilder's body. It looked totally out of place. To me, that's not the Hulk - the Hulk is angry and should exude danger at all times. And even when he's not snarling or roaring, he still looks serious. And before anyone says it, I've heard all the excuses about this showing the peaceful side of Hulk, etc ............ my opinion remains the same, they got his face all wrong.

 

[Captain Marvel]

I agree with you, elgaz. The Hulk in that movie just looked plain bad. At least in TIH he looked menacing. He was also ridiculously large. He's the Hulk, not the Jolly Green Giant. Eight or nine feet is as high as he should go.

And wow, that foam picture just reminded me of one of the most embarassingly bad scenes put on film ever. We have one of the film villains hobbling around in a neck and leg brace and, because he's taking so damn long to hobble his way over to the Hulk, Ang Lee actually fast forwarded that scene a bit. We're then met not only with the silliness of Talbot trying to drill a sample out of the Hulk's colossal head, but firing a missile at the Hulk, having it ricochet back, and then that ridiculous shot of the explosion that kills Talbot.

"So long, big boy."

Gah! And there're people who actually think this is a good movie?

 

[The Morningstar]

I can understand not liking the design, but the cgi was great, still is pretty decent and it's nearly ten years ago. And Avengers is using that kinda body design, bigger and bulkier.

 

[Captain Marvel]

I'm looking at the final fight right now, and wow, there're some parts where it looks like an animated cartoon and not a live-action film. Particularly when he's underwater. Not what I call good CGI at all. As for The Avengers, I don't see any hint that they're making Hulk anywhere near the size he was in the Ang Lee movie. The size difference is more along these lines...

...and less like this.

 

[The Morningstar]

I'm talking about the physique, the shape of his body not the size.

And you're cherry picking. Show some shots of him smashing the tanks up, or sprinting and fighting the Comanche's. Going to the upper atmosphere with the jet. Surviving airstrikes. Or the nightmare scenes where Hulk is in his closet. The part in the mirror is especially good because it shows the Hulk resents Banner, it's actually some characterisation for Hulk.

 

[Captain Marvel]

I liked that desert scene, albeit that's pretty much the only scene I liked. But even then, yeah, the Hulk looked bad. I was going to comment in a prior post about one particular scene that just stuck out really badly to me. It wasn't even a close-up shot, but a wide shot of the Hulk running through the desert, and it just looked so obviously fake. So yeah, altogether, the Hulk in that movie did look pretty terrible.

And even if Marvel went with a physique more close to that... so what? That doesn't mean they think it's a good movie, especially given that they rebooted it with TIH instead of continuing it. That should give you an indication of what they think of that movie. Now, if they really thought it was awesome, then they'd copy the style of the movie. Comic panels all over the screen, gamma irradiated dogs, nebulous gassy opponents...

Fortunately for us, Whedon decided to go a different route with The Avengers.

Incidentally, I decided to check out Rotten Tomatoes and here's what I came up with. Both movies are rated as follows:

62% Hulk
66% The Incredible Hulk

Not much of a difference. HOWEVER, I then checked the user ratings. 395,301 users, which could be considered a representative sample, rated Ang Lee's Hulk at 34%. The Incredible Hulk, on the other hand, was rated by 682,600 users, who rated it at 75%. Now that's a big difference in how much people enjoyed each movie. Numbers which jive with my own personal experience. As I said, I took my family on my birthday to see Hulk. My nieces, sister, brother-in-law, brother, sister-in-law, nephew, and I. Nine people, total, and every one of us came out of that theater absolutely hating the movie. Those same people, however, all love The Incredible Hulk. When we had a family get together somebody put on The Incredible Hulk and people sat down to watch it and enjoyed it. Nobody would've ever done the same for Ang Lee's Hulk.

So yeah, I could sit here all day running off lists about why I think X movie is better than Y, but really, there's only one thing I or anyone else needs to say. I've seen The Incredible Hulk several times and I'll rewatch it because I find it to be an enjoyable movie. Hulk, however, I only saw once and I'll only ever rewatch it when I'm arguing about it on the internet and need to refresh my memory about how bad it was so I could better pick it apart. That right there pretty much says it all.

 

[elgaz]

Some of the action scenes weren't bad, but then this was a Hulk movie - good action scenes are a basic prerequisite.

People still seem to be divided about the CGi in Lee's film. Personally I didn't think it was great overall. It was worse in close-up scenes with bright lighting which showed up every detail. Some examples -

Green way too bright, Hulk's upper body area looks different/inconsistent to other shots, the purple shorts just don't look real at all

Same scene, this is where he's starting to shrink. Looks very much like what it is - a real life scene with a computer-rendered character dropped in

Again, colour and texture make it look like a computer character dropped into the frame - which is what it is. Hence unrealistic.

No explanation needed. Even the biggest Hulk supporter has to admit this looks freakin' terrible.

Maybe it's just me, but I look at this picture and it looks wrong. Dimensions are off or something. Again, he doesn't look real, and this makes it so much harder to lose yourself in what you're seeing onscreen.

And finally ................. 'nuff said. Was this a cinema blockbuster, or some cheap horror film from the 90s about monster dogs?

Now I'm not all negative. Far-off shots like this looked fine, as did darker ones or ones with dust/etc hiding inconsistency. These renderings below looked ok because they didn't really show the Hulk exposed in direct sunlight and/or up close, and that seems to be where the CGi suffered most. On on a whole, the inconsistency in CGi in the film got to me.

 

[elgaz]

And on a totally separate note, can I just add one of my favourite shots from TIH - which was very much a homage to the Bill Bixby TV series. It's when Banner (shrouded in darkness) is about to Hulk out and after closing his eyes and wincing in pain, opens them to reveal the gamma radiation kicking in. This was always a good signal for everyone to run lol

 

[BigThor]

Incidentally, I decided to check out Rotten Tomatoes and here's what I came up with. Both movies are rated as follows:

62% Hulk
66% The Incredible Hulk

Not much of a difference. HOWEVER, I then checked the user ratings. 395,301 users, which could be considered a representative sample, rated Ang Lee's Hulk at 34%. The Incredible Hulk, on the other hand, was rated by 682,600 users, who rated it at 75%. Now that's a big difference in how much people enjoyed each movie.

Woah, I knew audiences liked TIH more than HULK but I didn't know the difference was that large and honestly I find the user rating to be more important that the critical rating.

User rating = the GA which makes up over 90% of the viewers

Critics rating = A few people who's job is to review movies and make up considerably less than 10% of the viewers

 

[Roose Bolton]

Really it comes down to what aspects of the Hulk you actually enjoy as a character and as a franchise. Some like things to be all smash and on the run, others prefer a psychological look at the mans personal demons. But at the end of the day they're both important to the character.

 

[BigThor]

True, TIH could've used as bit more of the psychological aspect of Hulk but it reasonated with the audience well and that's the most important goal of any film.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I'm excited about The Avengers, Spider-Man, and TDKR, but I can still spare enough brain cells to talk about Hulk movies too.

Once again, I have been doing this for 4 years. My opinion and reasons have been stated many times over.

 

[Spider-Fan]

No, the fans of Hulk go into detail because they have stuff to talk about besides "But Hulk fought Abomination!"

And, TIH had great elements, too. TIH's action is not the only reason I prefer it. I prefer its approach to the Banner character. Ang's Hulk film sought to understand the Hulk, while TIH sought to establish its relationship between the two. Banner wants to destroy the Hulk, and at first he has no control over the beast. It is only when he attempts to control it to some degree that he learns it can be guided. This makes him a hero. Strong arc. It also hilighted how great of a man Banner is when he jumps out of the plane, not knowing he will become the Hulk again. That is a strong character moment, and shows us a lot about the kind of man Banner is inside. You see why the Hulk is a noble monster.

Ang's Hulk also has a gaping plothole. The military randomly lets his father see his son...why? It makes no sense. Then, they let him yell and insult him for like 10 minutes. The guys who are super worried about the Hulk coming out are letting the source of his pain make him angry. What kind of military morons are they? That whole scene makes no logical sense. The first second he looked remotely mad, they should have zapped him. TIH follows the plot's logic much more fluidly.

I also liked the fast paced action and movement of the camera in TIH. Added a lot to the atmosphere. I liked how everyone approached their characters, and I felt the arcs all met up strongly at the end of the film. It doesn't attempt to be as deep as Hulk is, I agree with Hulk fans here. But, that doesn't make Hulk better because Hulk didn't accomplish what it set out to do. TIH is just a better movie.

This is my opinion, of course. But all the Hulk fans saying TIH are basically idiots who like it cause it is faster paced are just making accusations that don't exist. I have a number of reasons for my opinion.