Suppose that The Hulk was delayed for 2-3 years to better take advantage of the more advanced CGI, do you honestly believe that he, the Hulk, would ever look 100% completely "real"? ILM is the cutting edge and even their baby, Star Wars Episodes I and II, have plenty of moments when things look like crap.
The Hulk was a tremendous movie going experience in my opinion. My kids loved it and so did my wife and I. I found that the Hulk looked best in the bright light of day and not the night shots, which really is the opposite of most CGI characters. There would never be a man to play the Hulk as he should be: 11ft. tall and 1500lbs. I trust that Thing in the inevitable Fantastic Four will look as equally impressive. Man, what would I give to see Hulk and Thing duke it out for a few minutes.
I liked it a lot and will add it to my DVD collection at the earliest opportunity.
Slowhand- You make a good point. I really enjoyed the movie.
I think they could have done better with some different technique for the effects, though. An actuall drawn cartoon added in maybe? , or miniature models and stop-action like in the old Sinbad movies... should be more perfected by now I'd think...
Stop knocking the hulk would ya? They did a fine job...how in the hell do you propose to make an 11ft. tall giant look real anyways? Not unless you do the old Godzilla thing and make a bunch of tiny models. Thank God they didn't do that. I guess the people disappointed by the cgi hulk thought the titanic was a real ocean liner used in the film..sigh..what has this world come to?
the CGI was fun and impessive, it was the story that was lacking, bad dialouge and a worse plot made for a below average movie, why cant movie makers stick to the comics when doing comic book movies WHY????? it worked for spiderman, the original batman and for the most part superman
__________________ "If you tell the truth, you never have to remember anything" -Twain
(sig by Scythe)