The HULK!

[Guest Just J]

Why do people not like this movie? I loved it at the theatre and after buying it on DVD I must say that it was one of the best movies I've ever seen. Lee's direction was brilliant, IMO. The acting was good. And the effects were breath taking. I can see people not liking it if they were looking for an action flick because it told a very in depth story. The thing is that when there was action it was great. I was never a real HULK fan, so don't think I'm a fan boy. I just want to get some people's input on why they didn't like it.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

I don't hate it, but for all the hype it received before it came out it was doomed not to meet up to people's expectations...

[Guest Just J]

I can see that. They hype kind of misleading. I just think that it was hyped in the wrong way.

[Guest Mindless_Aggression]

They hyped it as 2 hours of the Hulk throwing shit and destroying random things. It was very much not that, which is why most kind of give it the proverbial stink eye. It just wasn't what it was marketed as.

[razazteca 0]

I hated the Nick Nolte role and how it finished,

Spoiler (Highlight to Read):

I wished that it ended with the Hulk stopping the rampage in the city when the girl asked him to.

[Guest Just J]

I hated the Nick Nolte role and how it finished,

Spoiler (Highlight to Read):

I wished that it ended with the Hulk stopping the rampage in the city when the girl asked him to.

I do agree with that Raz. The thing with the father could have been milked a little better for another flick. But I did like Nolte in that part.

 

They hyped it as 2 hours of the Hulk throwing shit and destroying random things. It was very much not that, which is why most kind of give it the proverbial stink eye. It just wasn't what it was marketed as.

 

That's my point exactly. I mean, the movie was an emotional roller coaster. It was soooo much more then just another action flick.

[Bruiser Chong 0]

I haven't seen it yet (did buy it, though), but it seemed that most of the people who weren't pleased with it were disapointed it didn't have more action and had more material that caused you to think.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Because the Hulk didn't show up for the first hour and the kiddies got bored. They would rather see Charlie's Angels than a movie that is actually about something.

[Karnage 0]

I agree with Raz, Nolte looked liked he was trying too hard to act and the movie went way too long.

It wasn't a horrible movie though, just a bit dissapointing for me. But then again, Spider-Man kinda dissapointed me on my 2nd viewing of it.

[Zack Malibu 0]

First off, let me say that I can occasionally seem biased since I'm a huge Hulk mark, dating back to my early childhood where I had every Hulk figure and watched Bill Bixby morph into Lou Ferrigno.

 

However, I agree that the movie was mis-marketed. Parents and kids figured that the Hulk would be just like Spider-Man or X-Men, with a lot of superhero and villain action to counteract the plot development. Hulk focused in solely on the plot development, and left the mindless rampages second.

 

SPOILER COMING UP:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I do agree that making David Banner into The Absorbing Man was really unnecessary. The Hulk had his crazy father and the whole damn military against him, but they needed to water it down by rewriting history and turning Bruce's father into one of the original Hulk villains (for you non-comic fans, The Absorbing Man is a former convict that became empowered with the same power you saw David Banner gain. Bruce's father was never superpowered in the comics.). They could have saved that for the sequel. Still, I loved the movie, and I was glad that they took time develop the characters and the reasons rather than give us a "HULK SMASH~!" fest.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

I flat out loved the movie and didn't get excited about seeing it until I heard that it wasn't a mindless action movie.

 

People wanted Spiderman.

 

Hell, people STILL think Spiderman was good.

 

Spiderman SUCKED.

[razazteca 0]

The movie went from focusing on Bruce and his girlfriend to Bruce and his crazy father. The shift to having the last 45 minutes of so being nothing but the father being a mad scientist was just too much. Nick Nolte was good in the movie but making him the main villian and going over the top with the finish was just too much.

[Guest SP-1]

Spider-Man was fine for what it was: a Superhero movie. Raimi sprinkled in the emotional elements that make Spidey the comic that it is, but didn't cater to the Emmy crowd with some deep, dark film. He made a superhero movie about a superhero. And it was good.

 

As for Hulk, I thought it was fantastic.

 

Until the final "battle".

 

Which sucked.

[imajackoff? 0]

I enjoyed Hulk.

 

As for the obvious dissapointment at the box office, I think it suffered from being a sort of "tweener" movie. It was too artsy for the mainstream crowd, and too mainstream for the art house folk.

[Guest JMA]

Hell, people STILL think Spiderman was good.

 

Spiderman SUCKED.

Many, MANY people would disagree with that. Based on what I've heard, Spider-Man is almost universally loved. As for The Hulk, I enjoyed it. Although the final battle was kind of... weird.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

Hell, people STILL think Spiderman was good.

 

Spiderman SUCKED.

Many, MANY people would disagree with that. Based on what I've heard, Spider-Man is almost universally loved. As for The Hulk, I enjoyed it. Although the final battle was kind of... weird.

Oh...I guess I'm wrong then.

 

Stupid movies for EVERYONE!!!

[Youth N Asia 0]

it was dumb to push it as this huge action deal when it was mostly story driven...and poorly done at that.

 

I was hella bored watching this movie. Too much story for characters I don't have any reason to care for.

[Guest JMA]

Oh...I guess I'm wrong then.

 

Stupid movies for EVERYONE!!!

I never said that. I just find it hard to believe that a "stupid" movie would be loved by fans as much as Spider-Man is. Are THEY all wrong? In my personal opinion, it was a great super-hero movie. Despite small changes (organic web-shooters, ect) I felt it stayed true to the character and the feel of the comic.

[Guest Just J]

I agree with bps on this one. Spider-Man wasn't that good. I enjoyed it, but it was still a bit of a let down. HULK was a far superior movie, IMO.

[Guest Dmann2000]

I really like HULK, the last 15 minutes or so (U know what) are muddled and I still don't get it, but hell overall it's very interesting, B+

[Vyce 0]

Let's not let this degenerate into a Spiderman vs. Hulk debate. Both movies have their merits.

 

I was quite fond of Hulk - I enjoyed it in the theaters, and I plan to buy the DVD soon. The movie was poorly marketed and I think, in some ways, Ang Lee gave us a film that (in the minds of many) was not what we thought it would be. But I think he did a good job of making the movie a look into the life of Banner rather than simply a full-out HULK SMASH action flick.

 

Spider-Man doesn't suck. It's good for what it was intended to be - a superhero action flick. Hulk concentrated more on the characters and the story, so in some regards, it's the "better" film, but both movies are enjoyable and entertaining.

[Lil' Bitch 0]

I liked the Hulk. I marked out once the smashing commenced.

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

I had a problem with the actors...all...moving...and...speaking...very...slowly.

 

I mean it seemed like every performance (with the exception of Sam Elliot) was just on cruise control. The editing and cinematography was Oscar-worthy.

[razazteca 0]

I had a problem with the actors...all...moving...and...speaking...very...slowly.

 

I mean it seemed like every performance (with the exception of Sam Elliot) was just on cruise control. The editing and cinematography was Oscar-worthy.

Hey it's not Star Wars Nu Episode or D&D bad. I kind of wished that M. Night was somehow involved in the Hulk movie because Unbreakable seemed to be the movie that Ang Lee wanted to make in the 1st place.

[Your Paragon of Virtue 0]

I had a problem with the actors...all...moving...and...speaking...very...slowly.

 

I mean it seemed like every performance (with the exception of Sam Elliot) was just on cruise control. The editing and cinematography was Oscar-worthy.

This is something I don't get. How can you tell whether or not a movie had good editing? Doesn't that have to do with what didn't show up, or what? What am I missing here?

 

Cinematography I'm hazy on too, but at least I have the general grasp on it. Editing as an artform I don't get at all though.

[Guest hhheld_down]

i saw hulk for the first time today and i thought it was very good for what it was. Its alot more deep, and concentrated than most superhero movies. I personally liked spiderman alot, i thought all the actors did an excellent job and the way it was told was very good. hulk is good, but something i would only watch once though. Spiderman is still perhaps my favorite comic book movie cuase it exceeded all my expectations and more. HULK is worth a look but not somethin i would own. if i were to grade it, Id say it was a B.

[razazteca 0]

I had a problem with the actors...all...moving...and...speaking...very...slowly.

 

I mean it seemed like every performance (with the exception of Sam Elliot) was just on cruise control. The editing and cinematography was Oscar-worthy.

This is something I don't get. How can you tell whether or not a movie had good editing? Doesn't that have to do with what didn't show up, or what? What am I missing here?

 

Cinematography I'm hazy on too, but at least I have the general grasp on it. Editing as an artform I don't get at all though.

Well in the scene in the desert when the Hulk is smashing up the military, the movie cut into comic book panels, I think that has something to do with editing excellence.

[DangerousDamon 0]

the editing in the hulk was very good. i liked how every scene would turn like a page in a comic book, or it would break into panels.

[Guest pete]

I liked the Hulk. It was a good movie. I would have cut about 20 minutes off its running time. First off lets look at Bruce and Betty. They put a lot of emphasis on them breaking up and wanted the viewers to root for them as a couple; the problem is we never really saw them together all that much together as a couple to cause us to root for them as a couple. We learned that Betty broke up with him becaue he was emotinally distant like her father. We never really got to see this while they were a couple. I also didn't like how they turned his father into the absorbing man. I felt the movie could have been better if the running time was different. I also felt if they told a slightly different story they might have been able to had more success. I still give the movie as a whole a B.

[Your Paragon of Virtue 0]

the editing in the hulk was very good. i liked how every scene would turn like a page in a comic book, or it would break into panels.

So that's editing? I see, I just thought that would fall into the "Director" category...