Will The new Hulk movie be a failure???

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I believe it will be, most people just didn't like the first movie at all.

This was a pretty lazy post but I was in a hurry.

The fact is I think that the first terribly received movie will kill this movie no matter how good it is. I think the people on the internet who liked the movie forget how bad the legs were how awful the reception was by the general moviegoer. You and most people on the net may have liked it but most non nerds hated it. I truely believe that it is, unfairly or not, the worse received comicook movie right after Batman and Robin. The problem with that is Batman is way more popular and beloved than Hulk and he had successful movies before B&R so he could come back with a successful movie, Hulk not so much. All he has is a old fondly remembered T.V show. His first movie is laughed at when people talk about comicbook movies, it's become a big fat joke. Hulk had good previews and promised a good film and most people didn't like it, why should I think after a few years people are just going to forget about the first one and pretend with the studio that this isn't some sort of sequel? If this movie was coming out in 2015 I would be with you on thinking that it could be a big hit, but it's not, it's coming out a mere five years after it's hated predecessor. I would be shocked if people suddenly forgot the first one and spent crap loads on another. Tombraider 2 made far less than the first because people just plan didn't like the the orginal I seriously doubt this movie is going to be seen as a non sequel and gross anywhere near this 200mil number I keep seeing thrown around. I see a lame opening bad legs and 85mil at the very best.

 

[Bannerless Hulk]

^Well, that makes a little more sense... though I think you're being a little harsh toward the first movie. Almost no one doubts whether TIH will be seen as a sequel - if anyone doesn't think it'll be seen as a sequel, even as it's not being sold as that, they're foolish. But $85M? Come on. Ticket prices are too high for a summer release to do that bad anymore. lol Originally I thought $200M was a conservative estimate, but it's probably on the high end. And I'm not an expert on comic book movies, but surely there've been more such movies than B&R to have a worse reception than the Hulk. If the experts were here, they would probably say Elektra, FF1, FF2 and X3 were all received worse than the Hulk. I mean, come on... Ang's Hulk wasn't that awful. It was just a bit of a "bore-fest," as some people like to say. There was a lot of good to it. At the very worst, it laid a solid foundation for the character (for future Hulk movies to build off of).

Now, for the moment of truth...

I went to see Dragon Wars last night, right? Oh my gosh, hands down, the dumbest movie ever made. I don't even know where to start. Picture Lord of the Rings meets New York City or The Last Samurai meets Mummy or some ridiculous combination like that with actors who I'm not sure attended acting school of any kind. The director and writer of the film had to be 13 years old. It was so bad that I came away unsure whether they weren't intentionally going for cheese. A guy gets shot and gets up without a scratch - no explanation whatsoever as to how he lives. So many things like that fly under the radar...you have to see it to believe. AD, I'll pay you $20 if you go see it and tell us what you think. It's only about an hour and 20 minutes long... you can do it, I know you can. lol

 

[SpaghettiHULK]

I think that the first one(bad or good) will be just a memory when a bad-ass trailer will come up and people see Ed Norton and Tim Roth... And a lot of amazing action scenes, with an heavy marketing and stuff like that.
And, anyway, I think that the first one is less hated than everybody think.

 

[SpaghettiHULK]

And I'm not an expert on comic book movies, but surely there've been more such movies than B&R to have a worse reception than the Hulk. If the experts were here, they would probably say Elektra, FF1, FF2 and X3 were all received worse than the Hulk.

Elektra, Daredevil, Catwoman, Spawn, B&R, Ghost Rider,LXG.... eeeeetc.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

^Well, that makes a little more sense... though I think you're being a little harsh toward the first movie. Almost no one doubts whether TIH will be seen as a sequel - if anyone doesn't think it'll be seen as a sequel, even as it's not being sold as that, they're foolish. But $85M? Come on. Ticket prices are too high for a summer release to do that bad anymore. lol Originally I thought $200M was a conservative estimate, but it's probably on the high end. And I'm not an expert on comic book movies, but surely there've been more such movies than B&R to have a worse reception than the Hulk. If the experts were here, they would probably say Elektra, FF1, FF2 and X3 were all received worse than the Hulk. I mean, come on... Ang's Hulk wasn't that awful. It was just a bit of a "bore-fest," as some people like to say. There was a lot of good to it. At the very worst, it laid a solid foundation for the character (for future Hulk movies to build off of).

The critics might have hated those movies more but I don't think that there is any proof the average moviegoer did. Do I think that GhostRider and Daredevil are worse movies than Hulk? Yes, but I don't think that most people would agree because those movies were atleast mildly entertaining. I'm not saying that the average moviegoer is the smartest cookie in the box but I do think that they sometimes get it right.

The thing about Hulk in my opinion is that it's a frustating movie more than anything else. They want you to care about the characters but they seem like disinterested zombies, there is far too much focus on science that doesn't exsit and the movie is living in the past so much so that you don't care about whats going on in the present. The movie is far too serious and the ah ha! supervillan dad thing at the end rings incredibly false as does the gimicky split screen technique. I can't even to begin to explain how much I hated Nolte's performance, I love over the top villain performances but that was ridiculous and it didn't fit in with what the rest of the cast was doing...acting like zomies i'd say.


This is obviously directed at another poster.

If Hulk wasn't as poorly recieved as most people think why did it drop 70% in it's second weekend in 2003? It wasn't a sequel and it was the first time Hulk was seen on the bigscreen. Also after that second weekend dive it countined to fall hard and manged to come away with a 2.2 multiplier. Thats horrible for a non sequel to big opening action adverture film, really horrible. If the movie wasn't that badly received why on earth didn't Universal make a Lee sequel?

 

[FrostBite]

This was a pretty lazy post but I was in a hurry.

The fact is I think that the first terribly received movie will kill this movie no matter how good it is. I think the people on the internet who liked the movie forget how bad the legs were how awful the reception was by the general moviegoer. You and most people on the net may have liked it but most non nerds hated it. I truely believe that it is, unfairly or not, the worse received comicook movie right after Batman and Robin. The problem with that is Batman is way more popular and beloved than Hulk and he had successful movies before B&R so he could come back with a successful movie, Hulk not so much. All he has is a old fondly remembered T.V show. His first movie is laughed at when people talk about comicbook movies, it's become a big fat joke. Hulk had good previews and promised a good film and most people didn't like it, why should I think after a few years people are just going to forget about the first one and pretend with the studio that this isn't some sort of sequel? If this movie was coming out in 2015 I would be with you on thinking that it could be a big hit, but it's not, it's coming out a mere five years after it's hated predecessor. I would be shocked if people suddenly forgot the first one and spent crap loads on another. Tombraider 2 made far less than the first because people just plan didn't like the the orginal I seriously doubt this movie is going to be seen as a non sequel and gross anywhere near this 200mil number I keep seeing thrown around. I see a lame opening bad legs and 85mil at the very best.

I think the general audience is more forgiving than most think. After all they lap up movies like the latter two POTC movies like kids with a birthday cake. Sure, when they first hear "The Hulk" they are going to go "Aw man... not another one." Even Batman Begins got that. But if you have an amazing trailer, you get more interest... further more if the movie turns out to be good, bam word of mouth hits. If word of mouth could make Batman Begins a success, it can for Hulk as well, it just takes time.

If people see a trailer that makes them go " !" Theres no way they won't take interest just because of the last one.

Besides to say people won't take interest to a pop-culture icon just because one movie dissapointed them is ridiculous. SW:Episode I ...many people I know thought it was a steaming pile of crap, but did they go back to see II? Yes.. then III? Yes.. Do you think no one will go see Wolverine because X-3 bombed? Gaurenteed they will. (Even though I find it a stupid idea.)

If something has a background, (and not just in Film) which Hulk does with it's TV show and comic books people are going to go see it regardless.

Something like Tomb Raider 2 I find to be a different story, because people could see right off the bat it wasn't going to be a big change over the previous.

 

[SpaghettiHULK]

This is obviously directed at another poster.

If Hulk wasn't as poorly recieved as most people think why did it drop 70% in it's second weekend in 2003? It wasn't a sequel and it was the first time Hulk was seen on the bigscreen. Also after that second weekend dive it countined to fall hard and manged to come away with a 2.2 multiplier. Thats horrible for a non sequel to big opening action adverture film, really horrible. If the movie wasn't that badly received why on earth didn't Universal make a Lee sequel?

There is, now, a lot of people that missed the movie in theaters in 2003 and catch it up later... and found it not so bad as expected... or also great!

And, yes, in this case, if you have an amazing trailer, you get A LOT more interest.

 

[Bannerless Hulk]

The critics might have hated those movies more but I don't think that there is any proof the average moviegoer did. Do I think that GhostRider and Daredevil are worse movies than Hulk? Yes, but I don't think that most people would agree because those movies were atleast mildly entertaining. I'm not saying that the average moviegoer is the smartest cookie in the box but I do think that they sometimes get it right.

The thing about Hulk in my opinion is that it's a frustating movie more than anything else. They want you to care about the characters but they seem like disinterested zombies, there is far too much focus on science that doesn't exsit and the movie is living in the past so much so that you don't care about whats going on in the present. The movie is far too serious and the ah ha! supervillan dad thing at the end rings incredibly false as does the gimicky split screen technique. I can't even to begin to explain how much I hated Nolte's performance, I love over the top villain performances but that was ridiculous and it didn't fit in with what the rest of the cast was doing...acting like zomies i'd say.

This is obviously directed at another poster.

If Hulk wasn't as poorly recieved as most people think why did it drop 70% in it's second weekend in 2003? It wasn't a sequel and it was the first time Hulk was seen on the bigscreen. Also after that second weekend dive it countined to fall hard and manged to come away with a 2.2 multiplier. Thats horrible for a non sequel to big opening action adverture film, really horrible. If the movie wasn't that badly received why on earth didn't Universal make a Lee sequel?

Honestly, I don't know how anyone can even measure a movie's reception by the general public, comic book movie fans or any demographic, really. Wouldn't they have to take an exit poll or conduct a survey to assess that sort of statistic? All we have are number of ticket sales, revenue, production budget and crap like that, and these measures are sketchy at best as far as capital 'C' conclusions go. No soft studies to measure tastes among viewers, viewing frequency and stuff like that... nothing that would support your claim.

Thus, you mention the Hulk's second weekend dropoff, but as bad as it was, can we really say it indicates the second-worst reception all-time among comic book movies? Is it possible that maybe more people turned out for Hulk's opening weekend than, perhaps, should have? I raise that possibility because some here have suggested the trailers were misleading, in which case it's not entirely our fault for rushing out to see what we thought was going to be principally an action flick (rather than all the psycho-babble that took us by surprise).

In response to your comment, "The critics might have hated those movies more but I don't think that there is any proof the average moviegoer did" I ask you: Do we have any proof for anything? Maybe it's the case that some of these movies (see Spaghetti's list in post #79) were more poorly received before anyone even went out to watch them. This would be evidenced by their overall poor box office performance, rather than a second weekend dropoff.

I dunno. Again, not an expert; just trying to raise possibilities. In general, I still think you're being just a little bit harsh toward the first movie, and it wasn't that bad.

 

[Ash Talon]

I've been debating the potential success of TIH, in relation to the Ang Lee version, with my friends. It could easily swing either way. The Lee version was universally (pun intended) panned and a commercial misfire, maybe more so than it deserves. However, the character has such widespread name recognition that it could succeed.

This said, I was talking to a friend of mine that works at marketing at one of the major studios. He's working on one of the tentpole summer movies for next year. He spoke to people at marketing vendors he's been dealing with on his license. He asked them what are the hot properties for next year. The said Iron Man and suprisingingly the Hulk. Not Indiana Jones, which seems to not be involved in licensing too much. Marvel has apparently been showing off a lot of stuff from TIH to convince vendors that this new Hulk movie is completely different. Vendors got burned with the last Hulk movie's merchandise, so Marvel's trying to make sure that doesn't happen again.

Potentially, TIH could be the surprise hit of next year. The character has such name recognition and is part of our cultural lexicon. I think there's a huge amount of love and interest in Hulk, and a movie done right could be huge. It could catch the pundits by surprise.

 

[ThatDamnNinja]

I've been debating the potential success of TIH, in relation to the Ang Lee version, with my friends. It could easily swing either way. The Lee version was universally (pun intended) panned and a commercial misfire, maybe more so than it deserves. However, the character has such widespread name recognition that it could succeed.

This said, I was talking to a friend of mine that works at marketing at one of the major studios. He's working on one of the tentpole summer movies for next year. He spoke to people at marketing vendors he's been dealing with on his license. He asked them what are the hot properties for next year. The said Iron Man and suprisingingly the Hulk. Not Indiana Jones, which seems to not be involved in licensing too much. Marvel has apparently been showing off a lot of stuff from TIH to convince vendors that this new Hulk movie is completely different. Vendors got burned with the last Hulk movie's merchandise, so Marvel's trying to make sure that doesn't happen again.

Potentially, TIH could be the surprise hit of next year. The character has such name recognition and is part of our cultural lexicon. I think there's a huge amount of love and interest in Hulk, and a movie done right could be huge. It could catch the pundits by surprise.

I expect it to have a relatively slow start... this movie's box office success is almost entirely contingent upon the quality of the movie, and I think they know that, so if it ends up being successful, it'll be because of the momentum generated by postive word-of-mouth.

 

[IncredibleHulk1]

no i dont think it will be a faliure on a multitude of things first of all Marvel has control of it so they wont turn it in to an absoulte waste of time like the first hulk movie was secondly Ed Norton is playing the title role of banner and hulk and is doing the motion capture as well as rewriting the script as the movie goes on so what this tells me about ed norton is he is dedicated to the role of hulk just like downey jr so iam not worried i have complete faith in this movie i dont care what the public thinks this movie will rock it hasnt finished yet so dont doubt it till we see a trailer or footage

 

[Solidus]

You know I do have hopes for this film, and if it is a good movie I think it will fare well in the box office numbers.

I hear a lot of people saying "well Batman Begins, a lot of people did not know it was a re-boot." Well yea, BB was the true first of it's kind that was successful. To that point there was not many huge well done remakes of films. And now that that has happend and as well as Casino Royale being a great re-boot, these "re-boots" are now more known by the public at large.

I think if people hear, 'now that re-boots are popular I'm sure they will' that TIH is a re-boot, though some may go, that was quick, I think people hear re-boot, and they see it as hope that this time a series will be done better, or done the right way. Again CR and BB are proof of this.

Also Ed Norton is a very loved actor, though he does not do huge block busters, most general movie goers know the name, and the youth loves him very much for popular "college" films like Fight Club, and American History 'X'.

I believe if :

-People see that it has a new cast, mainly Ed Norton
-People hear that it is a re-boot.
-People may hear from fans and other sources that the studio admited 'Hulk's failings.
-And mainly if the movie is good, word of mouth will spread just as it did with Batman Begins, which I think had a harder time convincing people after movies such as Batman and Robin (shudders)

I hope and think this movie will be good. And if it is, I'm sure it will be easy to do well at the BO.

 

[Sava]

I've been debating the potential success of TIH, in relation to the Ang Lee version, with my friends. It could easily swing either way. The Lee version was universally (pun intended) panned and a commercial misfire, maybe more so than it deserves. However, the character has such widespread name recognition that it could succeed.

This said, I was talking to a friend of mine that works at marketing at one of the major studios. He's working on one of the tentpole summer movies for next year. He spoke to people at marketing vendors he's been dealing with on his license. He asked them what are the hot properties for next year. The said Iron Man and suprisingingly the Hulk. Not Indiana Jones, which seems to not be involved in licensing too much. Marvel has apparently been showing off a lot of stuff from TIH to convince vendors that this new Hulk movie is completely different. Vendors got burned with the last Hulk movie's merchandise, so Marvel's trying to make sure that doesn't happen again.

Potentially, TIH could be the surprise hit of next year. The character has such name recognition and is part of our cultural lexicon. I think there's a huge amount of love and interest in Hulk, and a movie done right could be huge. It could catch the pundits by surprise.

WTF?... Hulk's merchendise sold more than Spidey 1's, hell, the merchendise was a huge hit

 

[Mr Jide]

This was a pretty lazy post but I was in a hurry.

The fact is I think that the first terribly received movie will kill this movie no matter how good it is. I think the people on the internet who liked the movie forget how bad the legs were how awful the reception was by the general moviegoer. You and most people on the net may have liked it but most non nerds hated it. I truely believe that it is, unfairly or not, the worse received comicook movie right after Batman and Robin. The problem with that is Batman is way more popular and beloved than Hulk and he had successful movies before B&R so he could come back with a successful movie, Hulk not so much. All he has is a old fondly remembered T.V show. His first movie is laughed at when people talk about comicbook movies, it's become a big fat joke. Hulk had good previews and promised a good film and most people didn't like it, why should I think after a few years people are just going to forget about the first one and pretend with the studio that this isn't some sort of sequel? If this movie was coming out in 2015 I would be with you on thinking that it could be a big hit, but it's not, it's coming out a mere five years after it's hated predecessor. I would be shocked if people suddenly forgot the first one and spent crap loads on another. Tombraider 2 made far less than the first because people just plan didn't like the the orginal I seriously doubt this movie is going to be seen as a non sequel and gross anywhere near this 200mil number I keep seeing thrown around. I see a lame opening bad legs and 85mil at the very best.

Who cares if this new movie comes out 5 years after Ang's mess? DAD came out in 2001 and many people, fans and the general public thought that movie crippled the Bond franchise, yet 5 years later, even during pre and post production of CR, the film was getting hate and all sorts of crap, scrutinising the lead actor among other things and upon its release, it gets hailed as one of the best, if not the best, not just as a movie but Craig being the one of best actors to play Bond. So, your 5 year gap comment just gets completely anihalated right there.
Also, Ang didn't completely destroy the hulk's popularity with just 1 lousy movie. What you seem to be ignoring is, this movie is very different in various ways. Among them are, 1) Marvel have taken back the rights to this movie, so I'm pretty sure the overall marketing and promotional strategy will be a lot different and 2) I'm pretty sure that there'll be quite some emphasis on the fact that we have a new cast and crew working on this movie. You seem to be under some sort of delusional spell that, you are fully aware of the general public's overall perception and expectations of this movie. Have you forgotton that there are a great deal of people that shockingly did like Ang's movie and also that the movie faired pretty well at the BO?
It doesn't matter if this movie is a sequal or a reboot or whatever, the fact that we have a new cast and crew after just 1 attempt is, a testament to how drastically different this movie wants to be from the first one. We have talented people working on this, especially Norton as Banner. The script intends to fix the problems that plagued the first movie by giving us a movie that fans expected from the first movie.
I think you're being far too hasty in judging the outcome of this movie. It's fine if you have your reasons, which you clearly do but those reasons need to be more logical and actually hold weight as opposed to simply fueling your opinions by being negatively presumptuous and blurting out narrow-minded sweeping statemnets.

 

[El Payaso]

I mean, if it's bad, it won't make money,

That's not necessarily that way.

fo reel.that was one of mine,another would be it took so damn long to see the hulk,it was 45 minutes

Man, Superman took 60 minutes to appear in STM and Batman took 60 minutes too in Batman Begins. Spiderman was more or less the same.

 

[James T. Kirk]

Man, Superman took 60 minutes to appear in STM and Batman took 60 minutes too in Batman Begins. Spiderman was more or less the same.

I think the people who are complaining about the 45 minute delay feel that those 45 minutes were boring, whereas with Superman, Batman, and Spider-Man, ok those development periods weren't action packed or even really exciting, but they weren't dull either.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Who cares if this new movie comes out 5 years after Ang's mess? DAD came out in 2001 and many people, fans and the general public thought that movie crippled the Bond franchise, yet 5 years later, even during pre and post production of CR, the film was getting hate and all sorts of crap, scrutinising the lead actor among other things and upon its release, it gets hailed as one of the best, if not the best, not just as a movie but Craig being the one of best actors to play Bond. So, your 5 year gap comment just gets completely anihalated right there.
Also, Ang didn't completely destroy the hulk's popularity with just 1 lousy movie. What you seem to be ignoring is, this movie is very different in various ways. Among them are, 1) Marvel have taken back the rights to this movie, so I'm pretty sure the overall marketing and promotional strategy will be a lot different and 2) I'm pretty sure that there'll be quite some emphasis on the fact that we have a new cast and crew working on this movie. You seem to be under some sort of delusional spell that, you are fully aware of the general public's overall perception and expectations of this movie. Have you forgotton that there are a great deal of people that shockingly did like Ang's movie and also that the movie faired pretty well at the BO?
It doesn't matter if this movie is a sequal or a reboot or whatever, the fact that we have a new cast and crew after just 1 attempt is, a testament to how drastically different this movie wants to be from the first one. We have talented people working on this, especially Norton as Banner. The script intends to fix the problems that plagued the first movie by giving us a movie that fans expected from the first movie.
I think you're being far too hasty in judging the outcome of this movie. It's fine if you have your reasons, which you clearly do but those reasons need to be more logical and actually hold weight as opposed to simply fueling your opinions by being negatively presumptuous and blurting out narrow-minded sweeping statemnets.

We will see what happens in 08. As of right now I see no reason why a Hulk semi sequel will do 200mil or anything near it.

 

[Mr Jide]

Yes, we'll see. I just want to say that I'm more interested in the quality of the film as opposed to its BO numbers....and right now, on paper the quality has surpassed that of what Ang gave us.

 

[Advanced Dark]

I loved the 1st film and it looks like I'm gonna love this one too. These are gonna be totally different film experiences that can be enjoyed separately for what they are. If you didn't like the first one maybe you'll like this one. So far everything looks nice and violent.

 

[Sava]

I think the people who are complaining about the 45 minute delay feel that those 45 minutes were boring, whereas with Superman, Batman, and Spider-Man, ok those development periods weren't action packed or even really exciting, but they weren't dull either.

have you even seen BB or Spidey1?

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

My biggest hope for all films is that they are good but I like talking about the boxoffice and this thread is kinda about box office numbers.

 

[James T. Kirk]

have you even seen BB or Spidey1?

Yes ... I have.

 

[James T. Kirk]

My biggest hope for all films is that they are good but I like talking about the boxoffice and this thread is kinda about box office numbers.

Then shouldn't it be called "Will The new Hulk movie be a financial failure???"?

 

[JeetKuneDo]

Besides to say people won't take interest to a pop-culture icon just because one movie dissapointed them is ridiculous. SW:Episode I ...many people I know thought it was a steaming pile of crap, but did they go back to see II? Yes.. then III? Yes.. Do you think no one will go see Wolverine because X-3 bombed? Gaurenteed they will. (Even though I find it a stupid idea.)

That's the second post alluding to X3 being worse than Hulk.

X3 did not "bomb". It is the highest grossing X Men movie. (20 mil more than X2 domestic...over 50 mil more worldwide.) It also sold a ton of DVD's...which made a mockery of the "bad word of mouth" theory being throw around. X3 is way more loved than Hulk will ever be. Ang Lee made a horribly boring movie.

 

[Advanced Dark]

First off it's all a matter of taste and preference. I enjoyed X2 for what it was, and I enjoyed X3, and the Hulk for what they were. They were all different means of escapism and completely different films.