Which Hulk LOOKED better to you?

[Judson Caspian]

That was the concept art that they were aiming for at the time of Comic-Con. And this is the final concept art they went for. I still prefer the old Comic-Con concept art though.

There's no difference between those concept images. Except he shows his teeth on the latter.

 

[Hmarrs]

Okay, whatever.... I guess I'll have to assume you have some sort of medical degree. Funny how nobody else picked up on this obvious mistake.

.

Well I am an artist and as Devince once pointed out the line between Artist and Physycin cross over since we both study Anatomy.

So to answer your question.YES>

 

[dcHulk]

.

Well I am an artist and as Devince once pointed out the line between Artist and Physycin cross over since we both study Anatomy.

So to answer your question.YES>

Devince is a nut then. If you are an artist, that's cool. I still don't agree with your assessment of the Hulk's anatomy. But to equate being an artist with a being a physician b/c you study anatomy is insane.

 

[Sarg92]

There's no difference between those concept images. Except he shows his teeth on the latter.

There are differences.

If you visit Aaron Simms' website, he has the Comic-Con concept art as an early design and the later one I posted as a final concept art.

There are differences such as the Comic-Con one is more primal/neandrathalish with a smaller nose, older looking face and bigger brow.

 

[Chris Wallace]

I can see it.

 

[DRUMM3RBOY]

Definitely Norton

 

[RogueDK]

That was the concept art that they were aiming for at the time of Comic-Con. And this is the final concept art they went for. I still prefer the old Comic-Con concept art though.

That looks soooo freakin' intense!

 

[Asteroid-Man]

I think we need a mix of the two hulks. This hulk was too shiny, the old one was too green. This hulk's hair looked greesy, the old hulk's muscles looked like styrofoam.

 

[Obi-Ron]

I agree, the best Hulk would combine elements of both versions.

 

[Abstract]

Norton's Hulk by a country mile. I just think he looks more real and life-like then Bana's Hulk.

Loved every minute he was on screen.

 

[[A]]

This is strictly about the Hulk's actual physical appearance, nothing else. I personally felt that the Bana version looked more lifelike, (meaning he blended into the scenery better-it looked more to me like he was actually there) but the Norton version had better detailing & looked more menacing.

I prefer The Incredible Hulk's one--looks more.. uhm.. say.. savage..? wild..? something like that

plus, I like that green better, heh

 

[Hmarrs]

Devince is a nut then. If you are an artist, that's cool. I still don't agree with your assessment of the Hulk's anatomy. But to equate being an artist with a being a physician b/c you study anatomy is insane.

Actually no it's not.Also I am not insane.
the question:
________________________________________________________________________________

Originally Posted by dcHulk
Okay, whatever.... I guess I'll have to assume you have some sort of medical degree. Funny how nobody else picked up on this obvious mistake.
_________________________________________________________________________________
This question was presented as to how well I know anatomy and whether or not I'm a doctor to make the claims I did.

My answer was I said the lines between doctor and artist cross over because both doctor and artist study anatomy and it's machanics we both study the human body.

Tell me what you think is so insane about that.

Devinci was a nut yes but he knew human anatomy any disiplined artist would.

To know it and be real about it.You have to study it.

 

[dcHulk]

Ok, Ok, I'm not going to continue this absolutely ridiculous argument over something so frivolous. You and I have a difference of opinion. I think you are wrong regarding the musculature of Hulk's forearm. Like I said before, I haven't seen anybody else comment on this "obvious error". Furthermore, I don't see any other (you said "hundreds") of anatomical errors in the depiction.

BTW, I might have a little bit of background in anatomy as well, since I am working on a Ph.D. in the biomedical sciences.

 

[Hmarrs]

Ok, Ok, I'm not going to continue this absolutely ridiculous argument over something so frivolous. You and I have a difference of opinion. I think you are wrong regarding the musculature of Hulk's forearm. Like I said before, I haven't seen anybody else comment on this "obvious error". Furthermore, I don't see any other (you said "hundreds") of anatomical errors in the depiction.

BTW, I might have a little bit of background in anatomy as well, since I am working on a Ph.D. in the biomedical sciences.

I think that's great get back to me when you finish your studies and then tell me what you think?

 

[1987olds442]

I liked both Bana's and Norton's Hulk, but if I was to choose I would say Norton's Hulk.

 

[\S/JcDc\S/]

I would probably put 2008 Hulk over 2003 but I kind of wish they found a way to do more of a cgi/makeup on a real actor instead. Both suffered from the cgi taking me out of realism.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I liked both and disliked both to some extents, so i'd have to vote equal.

 

[Sarg92]

I would probably put 2008 Hulk over 2003 but I kind of wish they found a way to do more of a cgi/makeup on a real actor instead. Both suffered from the cgi taking me out of realism.

Not gonna happen.

CGI is the only way for Hulk and Abomination.

Don't say it is possible cos Del Toro made Hellboy work but Hellboy has human proportations whereas Hulk is 9ft and Abomination is 15ft and both are pure muscle.

And Leterrier tried the man in suit approach for Hulk and Abomination but he said the physics of the creatures wasn't right so they went for full CGI.

 

[Chris Wallace]

I prefer The Incredible Hulk's one--looks more.. uhm.. say.. savage..? wild..? something like that

plus, I like that green better, heh

More menacing, more savage.
Potato, po-tah-to.

 

[DarknessOfDeath]

Norton's Hulk. :heart:

 

[[A]]

More menacing, more savage.
Potato, po-tah-to.

Ahhh I don't get it

 

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Not gonna happen.

CGI is the only way for Hulk and Abomination.

Don't say it is possible cos Del Toro made Hellboy work but Hellboy has human proportations whereas Hulk is 9ft and Abomination is 15ft and both are pure muscle.

And Leterrier tried the man in suit approach for Hulk and Abomination but he said the physics of the creatures wasn't right so they went for full CGI.

I try not to use Hellboy as a crutch in that argument I disagree with those who claim "impossible" Obviously it would be more complicated and likely increase the budget, but I would say in the end offer a better character. Btw if Hulk scenes are shot green screen mostly, and scale environments where needed it can be accomplished.

 

[Chris Wallace]

Not gonna happen.

CGI is the only way for Hulk and Abomination.

Don't say it is possible cos Del Toro made Hellboy work but Hellboy has human proportations whereas Hulk is 9ft and Abomination is 15ft and both are pure muscle.

And Leterrier tried the man in suit approach for Hulk and Abomination but he said the physics of the creatures wasn't right so they went for full CGI.

I'm curious. Tried how? What made him give up on it?

 

[Sarg92]

I'm curious. Tried how? What made him give up on it?

I am not sure to be honest.

http://marvel.com/movies/Hulk.The_Incredible_Hulk_(2008)

With the little video player in the top right, click on the fourth clip called "Incredible Hulk Fan Q&A, Part3" and the first question asked to Leterrier is how are they going to show Abomination on screen. Is he going to be CGI or man in a suit. Leterrier replies by saying CGI and that he tried the man in suit approach with both Hulk and Abomination but the physics of the characters was wrong cos they are so large and powerful so CGI was the only way to go but man in a suit didn't work out.

 

[Atrax robustus]

Norton Hulk for me. Physical appearance, movement, attitude, shade. Everything was better in my opinion.