Will The new Hulk movie be a failure???

[Figs]

Totally disagree. Pretty much everyone will think this is a sequel.



Ok



I doubt they'll openly diss one of their previous films.



Unfortunately 50,000 excited comic book fans have next to no impact on the over BO. (50,000 fans x $10 ticket x 4 viewings each = 2 million = peanuts)



No chance of this. Once a franchise is established, they might consider a cliffhanger, but this is not the case for TIH.


Even though I disagree with most of the quoted points, I do hope the film succeeds. They've got my $10 anyways.

That's damn true! I couldn't believe how many people I knew and heard about that thought Batman Begins wasn't a reboot.

 

[moguy]

That's my biggest fear too, but i think the main point of the marketing plan, once it starts, should be this movie is nothing to do with Ang's film, blah, blah,blah. I think trashing Angs film might also help too. It may not be right, but the public will get the point.

Yep that's the main obstacle, and it's a huge one.

I really don't think they are going to openly "trash" the Ang Lee version.

They will try to differentiate for sure, but not by bashing the first one.

Even WB never put out any commercials bashing B&R while marketing BB. They just made sure the advertisements had a very different tone.

 

[Advanced Dark]

This whole thread is ridiculous.

 

[co2]

I get so irritated when I tell people a new Hulk movie is coming out next year and they either give a puzzled look and ask "Another one?!", or they roll their eyes and sigh. If this movie fails, I'm afraid Hulk will be relegated to lower tier status in terms of public popularity. I sure would like to see the character climb back up alongside Spider-man like he was in the 70's and 80's.

 

[manofsteel4life]

I get so irritated when I tell people a new Hulk movie is coming out next year and they either give a puzzled look and ask "Another one?!", or they roll their eyes and sigh. If this movie fails, I'm afraid Hulk will be relegated to lower tier status in terms of public popularity. I sure would like to see the character climb back up alongside Spider-man like he was in the 70's and 80's.

i do to....but most of the reactions i get when i tell people(friends) that they are making a brand new hulk are little different......they all give me a reaction like...they are relieved that its going to be a brand new hulk....but i also agree that this is almost like the last chance they have to bring hulk back into superstardom.......caaa mon Ed....you can do it!!

 

[Golgo-13]

I get so irritated when I tell people a new Hulk movie is coming out next year and they either give a puzzled look and ask "Another one?!", or they roll their eyes and sigh. If this movie fails, I'm afraid Hulk will be relegated to lower tier status in terms of public popularity. I sure would like to see the character climb back up alongside Spider-man like he was in the 70's and 80's.

I get the same reaction from ppl. Marketing better have one hell of a plan this time round. I hope those bozo's that marketed the first film, have long gotten their walking papers.

 

[Sava]

I get the same reaction from ppl. Marketing better have one hell of a plan this time round. I hope those bozo's that marketed the first film, have long gotten their walking papers.

well, Universal still suck at marketing their movies but i'm sure Marvel still have final approval over everything they do.

 

[moguy]

I get the same reaction from ppl. Marketing better have one hell of a plan this time round. I hope those bozo's that marketed the first film, have long gotten their walking papers.

Actually, the marketing of the first one wasn't an issue. That's why it had an excellent opening weekend. Terrible word of mouth afterwards killed the film.

Based on the marketing, people expected a fun action filled movie. Instead they got a very deep, and very slow psychological thriller with some fantasy elements.

I still remember seeing the film with my two nephews (7 and 9). They were so excited to go based on the commercials and toys.

Poor little guys were practically asleep before the hulk made his first appearance an hour into the movie.

The marketing of the first film was actually quite good. That's why it's going to be so hard to convince the general public that this character deserves a second chance.

 

[Figs]

Whenever I tell people about it I mention the fact that Banner is being played by Edward Norton and that gets them excited. Some say Norton isn't a huge box office draw, he sure ain't Pitt or Cruz but he's known enough and proven himself as an actor to were he will definetly help bring people to see it.

 

[James T. Kirk]

A quote from an article at this address

http://www.superheroflix.com/news/55/22555.php

"The film is a sequel to 2003's Hulk"

****ty ****ing mistakes like this don't help people who are confused by this movie understand it any better. Why the hell can't these writers get their ****ing facts right? I could understand if this was an article on a regular news site, although that's no excuse and I wouldn't forgive it, but that's another superhero movie site. You'd think they'd have bothered to remember what was said at Comic Con, or checked out the new official synopsis. Christ.

 

[moguy]

I'm happy Norton is playing Banner.

But as far as box office draw, has he ever headlined a blockbuster (something that's made over 150M).

I can't think of one. (and don't say Fight club, it banked far more on Pitt, and still wasn't a huge hit)

I'm actually a little concerned that to get Norton, they had to give him complete control over the script. That's a pretty big concession.

Hopefully it pays off.

 

[moguy]

A quote from an article at this address

http://www.superheroflix.com/news/55/22555.php

"The film is a sequel to 2003's Hulk"

****ty ****ing mistakes like this don't help people who are confused by this movie understand it any better. Why the hell can't these writers get their ****ing facts right? I could understand if this was an article on a regular news site, although that's no excuse and I wouldn't forgive it, but that's another superhero movie site. You'd think they'd have bothered to remember what was said at Comic Con, or checked out the new official synopsis. Christ.

And that's a freaking comic book movie site.

Imagine the general public's perception.

 

[Golgo-13]

Actually, the marketing of the first one wasn't an issue. That's why it had an excellent opening weekend. Terrible word of mouth afterwards killed the film.

Based on the marketing, people expected a fun action filled movie. Instead they got a very deep, and very slow psychological thriller with some fantasy elements.

Dude you just contradicted yourself.

The marketing WAS the problem. For one thing, ppl don't like to be decieved. They paid money because what was advertised was an action/popcorn movie. Instead what they got was ...well, what you described, which was equal to a deep borefest, which felt like a Dr.Phil session. I for one didn't like being lied to.

If they had advertised the movie for what it was, would it have filled seats..? Maybe. Maybe not. We'll never know now. I truly believe that Universal intentionally decieved the public to get them in the theatres, and just prayed like hell the flashy effects would have hooked everyone, once we were in there. Instead it backfire on them. Which is why they are doing what's rarely heard of in hollywood; re-booting a franchise in as little as 4 years.

 

[James T. Kirk]

And that's a freaking comic book movie site.

Imagine the general public's perception.

Exactly, that's what I'm saying. If a comic book movie site can't be bothered to get their facts right, the general public haven't a hope.

 

[moguy]

Dude you just contradicted yourself.

The marketing WAS the problem. For one thing, ppl don't like to be decieved. They paid money because what was advertised was an action/popcorn movie. Instead what they got was ...well, what you described, which was equal to a deep borefest, which felt like a Dr.Phil session. I for one didn't like being lied to.

If they had advertised the movie for what it was, would it have filled seats..? Maybe. Maybe not. We'll never know now. I truly believe that Universal intentionally decieved the public to get them in the theatres, and just prayed like hell the flashy effects would have hooked everyone, once we were in there. Instead it backfire on them. Which is why they are doing what's rarely heard of in hollywood; re-booting a franchise in as little as 4 years.

I meant that the marketing succeeded by getting people in the theater that opening weekend.

I doubt the marketers were told to sell the movie as a slow psychological thriller.

If they had marketed it in that way, then the movie would have bombed even worse, since it would not have had those big opening numbers to add to the tally.

So getting a 62M opening weekend has to be a considered a success for the marketing of the film.

But I totally agree that, the implied deception will adversely affect TIH. People will assume it is more of the same.

 

[Sarg92]

Dude you just contradicted yourself.

The marketing WAS the problem. For one thing, ppl don't like to be decieved. They paid money because what was advertised was an action/popcorn movie. Instead what they got was ...well, what you described, which was equal to a deep borefest, which felt like a Dr.Phil session. I for one didn't like being lied to.

If they had advertised the movie for what it was, would it have filled seats..? Maybe. Maybe not. We'll never know now. I truly believe that Universal intentionally decieved the public to get them in the theatres, and just prayed like hell the flashy effects would have hooked everyone, once we were in there. Instead it backfire on them. Which is why they are doing what's rarely heard of in hollywood; re-booting a franchise in as little as 4 years.

I know what you mean. When I saw the trailers with my uncle we were like woah! This film is going to have some great action but when I watched the film I was like, what? This is completly different to what the trailers made the movie out to be.

I think the word of the mouth thing is true aswell. People saw the film and their friends would be like "That Hulk movie looks great!" then they will be told it is "boring" and you shouldn't watch it.

With Marvel controlling the marketing of this new movie I think everything should go ahead fine and NO this film will not be a faliure.

 

[moguy]

I know what you mean. When I saw the trailers with my uncle we were like woah! This film is going to have some great action but when I watched the film I was like, what? This is completly different to what the trailers made the movie out to be.

I think the word of the mouth thing is true aswell. People saw the film and their friends would be like "That Hulk movie looks great!" then they will be told it is "boring" and you shouldn't watch it.

With Marvel controlling the marketing of this new movie I think everything should go ahead fine and NO this film will not be a faliure.

I think this totally supports my point.

The marketing worked. It got people into the theaters.

The problem wasn't the marketing, it was the film itself.

That's why people will be hesitant to see this one no matter how well it is marketed.

Word of mouth killed the Hulk, but word of mouth can make TIH a hit. This time around it will be much more important than the marketing.

 

[Bannerless Hulk]

Which is why they are doing what's rarely heard of in hollywood; re-booting a franchise in as little as 4 years.

5 years... which still isn't much, but the extra year helps.

Exactly, that's what I'm saying. If a comic book movie site can't be bothered to get their facts right, the general public haven't a hope.

Dude, calm down. There's like 4 posts on a total of 4 threads across the site's 6 Hulk boards... with your post accounting for 25% of all of the posts made. Who do you think is going to these sites? The general public sure isn't. I understand your frustration, but you act like the movie's entire fate rests on whether or not people will think of it as a sequel. Of course they will. It's going to be up to the movie itself to change their opinions.

So getting a 62M opening weekend has to be a considered a success for the marketing of the film.

But I totally agree that, the implied deception will adversely affect TIH. People will assume it is more of the same.

The problem wasn't the marketing, it was the film itself.

That's why people will be hesitant to see this one no matter how well it is marketed.

Word of mouth killed the Hulk, but word of mouth can make TIH a hit. This time around it will be much more important than the marketing.

The $62M opening weekend was a June record at the time, but it was the 69.7% drop the following weekend that opened my eyes a bit. It was one of the largest second-weekend drops ever (the movie is presently 46th in this category). Thus, it had to be the film itself that caused such a huge drop.

I'm just not sure that, given the damages to the Hulk's reputation as a result of the first movie, any amount of positive word-of-mouth can help much this time around. But if there was ever a way to recover what was lost, I'd think it'd have to start with Hulk fans - not Marvel and certainly not Universal. We have faster, more influential access to our families and friends than any corporation does.

 

[Golgo-13]

5 years... which still isn't much, but the extra year helps.

..i meant 4 years when it became official that it was gonna be a re-boot.


I think this movie will do what Batman Begins did. The opening weekend for BB was so-so but word of mouth kept ppl coming back, and it became a hit. Ppl had an extremely sour taste left in their mouths after 'Batman and Robin', so were very skeptical about Begins but it turned out fine..which was apparent by the dvd sales, as BB flew off the shelves once it come out on dvd. I believe TIH will take the same route....but only if the story is engaging to watch like Batman Begins was.

 

[Arkady Rossovich]

Everyone is optimistic about this film,even myself.I doubt anyone will call it a failure until it's in theaters.

 

[Advanced Dark]

Nobody can call any movie failure before it's had a chance to prove itself as a film and at the box office. Again this thread is stupid.

 

[combusticator]

Even if the movie doesn't do GREAT, if it's a GOOD film (which 90% sure likely it will be), and since it IS Hulk, it will do at the very minimal DECENT...and the good word of mouth will spread it through to great DVD sales and more movies, which I'm pumped for as long as the same crew stays aboard.

This is a little different situation than Batman in that it's a shorter time frame, but new writer actor and director will help.

I remember telling people how pumped I was about Batman Begins, and people were like "whah?" cuz they could only think of Batman & Robin...but didn't take too long to make them forget it.

Might be a little harder, but I think the same effect will happen.

 

[kedrell]

This is a little different situation than Batman in that it's a shorter time frame

I don't see it as different really at all. That's only a 2-3 year difference(Batman 7 or 8, Hulk 5), which is nothing after all is said and done.

 

[thegameq]

I can defintley see this Hulk film having the same mix if not worse reaction than the last one. With Lettier (sp?) directing it and Norton hands on approach, there could be some clashes. But that's not the issue for me. The issue would be if the crew decided to put more of an emphasis on smash em action. Now that's great of your Hulk fan, however look at like this...

If your someone who liked Ang Lee's Hulk, you may feel you have a watered down film with this follow-up.More importantly the general public might have already made there minds up about Hulk beforehand and think its just a typical no-brains action movie with bad CGI.

I'm not saying that's how the film will be, but I could definetly see people thinking like that.

I agree, I think this film definitely needs to be a tight rope act between classic Hulk action and a good story. Granted the man on the run, reluctant hero angle has been used before, but it really serves the Hulk well.

With Norton, i think the story angle should be covered. The action...I just don't know, nothing against LL. Hulk sized action is big budget sized and over the top. It really needs to feel like comicbook action ala Spidey and Supes.

 

[thegameq]

That's my biggest fear too, but i think the main point of the marketing plan, once it starts, should be this movie is nothing to do with Ang's film, blah, blah,blah. I think trashing Angs film might also help too. It may not be right, but the public will get the point.

The marketing of this film may prove to be the deciding factor for how well this film is received. Rather than the psyhcodrama and secrecy of the first film, they could simply play up to the strenghts of such movies, much like Iron Man seems to be doing and Columbia did with Spidey; comicbook fantasy. Just show somes scenes of Hulk being the Hulk (I'm talking holy *****, WOW, did you see that? type scenes). If the more fantastic approach of LL film doesn't separate it from Angs, I don't know what will.