This looks 598.7% better than Ang Lee's version. As a Hulk fan, I am exuberant they made a reboot and not a sequel, and I am especially glad they're making it more like the comic story this time around.
The grittyness/roughness look of this Hulk is definitely a move in the right direction, Ang Lee's always looked to shiny and boyish looking for me.
Ang Lee got one half of Hulk's story right with pinpoint accuracy, but he focused far too much on the psychological side of his story, and forgot the fact that he's also The Hulk.
Admittedly I hope it's not two hours of Hulk just smashing stuff up, cos that would be the polar opposite of Ang Lee's version. Hopefully it'll be good, though.
I liked the psychology actually. I thought he failed a little at making it seamless with Hulk being Hulk though. And I didn't like the confusing father-thing happening there.
And the editing was astounding, I doubt they will beat that.
I thought Ang Lee's movie was pretty good, anyway. Also, I think Eric Bana beats Ed Norton in the casting department for a Hulk film.
__________________ Full fathom five thy father lies;
Of his bones are coral made;
Those are pearls that were his eyes:
Nothing of him that doth fade
But doth suffer a sea-change
Into something rich and strange.
As good as Edward Norton can be, Eric Bana just hits the mark as Bruce Banner. I'd also take Ang Lee as a director over the director of the Transporter anyday, even if Lee's previous entry had its faults.
I didn't mean effectswise. I meant in the sense of the very serious psychological story of Banner and Betty and stuff, and the comic book feel of the mindless Hulk destroying stuff... The two elements kinda clashed storywise a bit IMHO.
Gender: Male Location: Sailing the seas of cheese.
I hope this thread stays here in the Movie Discussion forum. I'd rather discuss this with normal movie fans, not comic book fanatics who are going to dissect everything from which side Bruce Banner parts his hair to how the skin tone of Hulk is actually a bit darker in the comic.
I think Edward Norton will blow away Eric Bana as Bruce Banner. Eric Bana looked to much like a jock frat boy and not enough like a nerdy scientist. I want to see a skinny little nerd turn into the Hulk, which is better for the whole Jekyll and Hyde vibe anyway.
He can fight like a shitting bastard, but I see your point, and agree with it really.
What do people think about Tony Stark allegedly appearing in this movie? Robert Downey Jr's version, I mean. Allegedly he's only got a cameo, but it's supposed to be the start of crossovers.
If they have to, let's just hope they stay the **** away from The Fantastic Four.
Actually it seems like it's a somewhat of a continuation, rather than a reboot...
according to an interview with the director, Banner transforms into the Hulk 3 min into the movie...
the reboot side of the movie, it seems, it's the direction (as well as the character's design)
I actually hated the Ang Lee version, I found unbearable, the FX sucked big time (He did looked like a pretty boy) , though the FX in this one aren't better either, it just looks more gritty.
I actually some the first movie until the puddles attacks (his father's dogs). I just couldn't watch it anymore, pop out the disk and I actually throw it away...seriously.
sometime afterwards I saw when that other guy try to inject the hulk with huge syringe and I just laugh my ass off....
__________________
"When Gotham is ashes, you have my permission to die." -BANE
Bruce Banner is one of the smartest men in the Marvel world, probably in the top three, next to Reed Richards and Docter Doom. I can see him being a little "iffy".
KMC Community Forums
Mar 17th, 2008 03:11 AM
