*** Official "THE HULK" Review Thread (1 Viewer)

[TerryRL]

:star: :star: :star: :star: 1/2 out of :star: :star: :star: :star: :star:

Fantastic movie. This is easily one of the best comic book adaptations I've ever seen. Ang Lee and ILM deserve mad props for what they were able to deliver with 'Hulk'.

 

[Jason Walstrom]

JOYGASM!It is an awesome movie. Ang Lee outdid himself. From the opening Montage, you know this movie is going to be different, along with Danny Elfman's score, the film opens in an intringuing way. The story of Bruce Banner has been given much more depth. Growing up with a traumatized childhood, He has learned to bottle up emotions, and concentrate on his work. Once the accident happens and we are treated to the Hulk, it is done in an awesome way, as to show all of that anger and hatred coming up, the time bomb finally goes off. The action scenes take awhile to get to but by then we know Banner's character very well, along with Jennifer Connely's character, Betty and her General Father, played by Sam Elliot. Nick Nolte is great as Banner's Ted Kaczinski looking father. It almost looks like the filmmakers picked Nolte up right outside the drunk tank and said, "Don't change a thing." THE ACTION set-pieces are frickin' wonderful, When the hulk starts to run real fast for the first time, I started giggling with delight, I thought the hulk looks awesome. I think in many ways, when the commercials started airing they were not done with the hulk visuals and alot of people commented on how CGIish the hulk looked. I think he looks great. I mean c'mon he is CGI and you know it, but it does not take you out of the story. THIS FILM IS VERY ENTERTAINING and believe me when I say it is one of the best COMICBOOK adaptations ever made. It's sound is one of the stars of the movie with all of the explosions and gunfire, along with the films cool editing tricks, I Can't wait for a sequel.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

Very interesting, and probably somewhat divisive. It DOES feel experimental, and it is extremely well-done. The director is an artist, and this film is something special. But I didn't love it. I have some minor gripes, but nothing in particular. The SFX were outstanding (but I've expected that ever since Dennis Muren was attached), the pacing even, and acting good, and the set-pieces great.

But while I saw the visual connection between Bruce and Betty, I didn't see it in the story. It worked in some scenes, but not enough for all the elements to be perfect. There is important story missing, and it's absence hurts the film's final push. The final confrontation was acceptable, but could have been more intriguing.

The other nits (and they are minor):
Some of the wipes were brilliant, but some were just there to be there. They didn't bother me, but less might have been more.

The Hulk was more of a character than Bruce. Bana was excellent...give him more.

What happened to Jennifer's curves :frowning:


And the democratic response:
The army vs. Hulk made my day, however. And often, the Hulk broke my heart (as he is supposed to do). I subscribe (as does the film, clearly) to the Peter David school of Hulk thought. The green Hulk is a scared child, looking for love and acceptance. It's Banner locked at four. ILM nailed that in the expressions.

The film is a piece of art, but not high art. There was a bit of hammy acting, and some of the dialogue was right out of the comic (and not at it's finest).

I like it quite a bit, but I don't love it. The film didn't always work for me...but it always tried, and clearly it worked very well for many members

I expected mixed audience response. But in a good way!

This is a tough one to grade. Not as tough as Solaris, but...tough.

8/10

Take care,
Chuck

 

[Matt Stone]

I was happy to see Ang take a chance on this one. It may not come off 100%, but I'd rather see the film error on being too artsy, than being too actiony (see Daredevil for infinite examples). There were obvious script problems, and Ang wasn't able too finish with a grand-slam ending ala Spiderman, but his experiment is an admirable one with many pluses.

I thought Bana was great as Bruce. Many will say that he was too bland and boring, but I feel that's what Bana was going for. It creates such a great juxtaposition between a calm Bruce Banner that doesn't want to know about his past, and a vengeful Hulk that wants to destroy everything around him. I'm not giving anything away, but there is a great little dream sequence where Banner confronts the image of the Hulk in a bathroom mirror. It's quite a powerful image for showing Bruce Banner's internal conflict.

Nolte was good, albeit a little too insane at times. As a taste issue, I liked his rants, but I would say that his character was a little imbalanced (perhaps on purpose). The Father/Son dynamic between Nolte and Bana is fantastic. A lot of comic book enthusiasts are complaining about the change to the Hulk's origin, but I feel that making the relationship between Bruce and his father the catalyst of the story is a great move from Lee and company. It makes the story much more personal and in my opinion, adds some needed depth.

Adding to the Father/Child dynamic is the great relationship between General Ross and Betty Ross. Sam Elliot does a fantastic job of being a psuedo-villain. As the audience, we can understand the reasoning of his actions, but at the same time we disagree with them. Connelly isn't all over the place, but she provides a very calm, soothing character that can make you understand why she is able to find the Bruce Banner within the Hulk.

There have been a buzillion (that's right folks, a buzillion) complains about the CG Hulk, but I was impressed. I must temper this with the fact that I also liked the effects in The Matrix Reloaded, which some others also seemed to have significant problems with. My feeling is that I understand there is no perfect CG yet, so when I see something that looks very real and vibrant, it impresses me. For contrast, just watch Daredevil (yep...picking on Daredevil again). The CG is very unbelievable, and at times very unnecessary. In The Hulk, on the other hand, I felt that the CG looked very realistic, and the physics of the Hulk's movement impressed me as well. It was breathtaking (much like the flying scenes in TMR) to see the Hulk jumping miles at a time. Bottom line: if you're going to a movie called the Hulk, about a guy that turns into a big Green monster...don't be some damn picky with "realism."

Now to the problems. As others have pointed out, some of the fight scenes were cheesy. I didn't have a problem with any, except for the end battle, but I can see where the complaints are coming from. It really boils down to taste. You're either going to like the action, or you won't...but you have to decide for yourself. As I briefly mentioned before, some of the stuff with Nolte is a little too wacky.

Aside from the minor taste-oriented nit-pick here and there, I didn't have too many problems with the film. I still prefer X2 for comic book adaptations, but overall the Hulk is a very good film. It's nice to see Ang Lee adapt a comic without treating the material like a throw-away cartoon. I'm also glad to see another movie buck the Daredevil syndrome of staying to close to the source material, and adding an in-joke at every turn. Lee was able to utilize all of the benefits of film, while keeping the heart of a comic on the screen at all times.

****/*****

 

[Dan Rudolph]

I loved it. I thought contray to certain people's whining, the Hulk looked great. I'd add to this that he gave some of the best CGI acting I've ever seen. I didn't find the end to be a huge letdown, btu it did bug me they left it so open-ended. Sicne there's a surely a seequel coming, it doesn't bother me too much, but I would have liked something like closure on this movie.

 

[John^Lal]

:star: out of 4
First off, the sound was going in and out, from loud and perfect to quiet and lets hear how many people in the theater are eating popcorn. and then, 25 min into the movie it got quiet for good. i went out and complained and all they said was "we been getting that all day". so why the hell you keep stealing our money?
Second-i was very tired (gone to bed at 2am, then gotten up at 6am to take a friend to the airport.)
oh well, this was the first time i was truly annoyed by the score and soundtrack of a movie. it seriously bothered me, there were cool uses of fades/dissolves and split screen and some great cinematography but there was A LOT of feeling missing. the split screens seemed to happen without effect because there was no powerful score to push us along and no SMART dialogue. "the government will pay us a lot of money, i mean a lot of money for this sample" 2 min later "we will get a fortune for this sample" after these kind of lines i am just sitting there asking myself 'are you sh**ting me? this is terrible, talk about on the nose dialogue.
to say the least, i was disappointed with this movie, even though i think with only a bit of changes it could have been improved dramatically...but maybe not.
and it took an hour(?) for any action to happen, and this allowed me to fall asleep and miss at least 20 minutes of the movie.

 

[Will K]

I loved it, too. Sure, the CGI was a bit shaky here and there, but I thought the acting, Lee's energetic direction, and the comic book-inspired editing balanced everything out just fine. I've heard complaints about the first hour, but I didn't find it boring at all; in fact, the whole movie moved at a good clip instead of Michael Bay type jackhammer pacing. I appreciated the fact that Lee was confident enough to let the audience get to know the characters before the fireworks began. Some reviews I've read into say children are likely to be bored with it, but the kids I overhead coming out of the theater were very, very happy.

Not a perfect film, but certainly much to enjoy for the senses and the brain.
:star: :star: :star: :star: /5

 

[Edwin Pereyra]

Hulk worked for me primarily because of the direction of Ang Lee. While the film is really more about style and atmosphere (and it does have a lot of it), it is also the humanization of these larger than life comic book characters that make this one a little different from other comic book films of late.

Eric Bana and Jennifer Connelly look good and work well with each other along with Nick Nolte and Sam Elliott in supporting roles. Ang Lee uses split screen techniques and fade to background transitioning from one scene to the next – all of these for a more comic book feel from page to screen. A little creativity from a very fine director does go a long way.

Danny Elfman’s score, while a little subdued, is quite effective. Furthermore, the CGI was not at all problematic and was actually good contrary to pre-release reports.

Will Hulk appeal to a broader audience? Who cares? The only thing that matters is that it worked for me.


Full Disclosure: This writer has an equity interest in Marvel Enterprises, Inc.

~Edwin

 

[Dave Scarpa]

Went to See the Hulk today and can concur this movie's sound was very Low while the audience was Loud and not it a Good way, But we muddled thru

I loved It. I don't understand why any fan of the Hulk would have a problem with this movie. This was a comic book movie brought to life with great skill and Dramtic Prescence. It was'nt sunk by Dumbing down to the Audience or playing it over the top. The Origina changes remained true enuff to the comic while adding an extra dimension needed to dramatically charge the story. Man caught in Accidental bomb blast/experiment is made much richer when a third element is added that made him what he is.

You cared about the characters, and finally I liked the CGI it was well done and only looked fake in a few scenes.

Very very Well done. Can't wait for the disk.

BTW the movie looked a 1:85 ratio no ?

(Admin note - please ask these sorts of questions in the Discussion thread for this film.)

 

[SteveMc]

I must say right off that I am not an avid comic reader. I had watched the orginal Hulk back in the day and was interested in seeing what the new movie had in store. After see initial previews for the movie, I was less than impressed...trying to keep my expectations low so I wouldn't be completely let down no matter how bad it was, or extremely pleased if it was good. Even having low expectations of the movie i must say I was still extremely disappointed.

I at least expected some kick ass action scenes in the film. There were two ok scenes that held my attention the entire movie, where he's fighting the dogs, and fighting the tanks. The rest of the story seemed to drag on and on. Not to mention the funky picture in picture transitions they had. It reminded me of the original series, but it was way over done IMO. In fact it seemed like I watched a two hour made for TV movie. And don't even get me started about the explosion death of "the bad guy".

The ending was well written (i think) but poorly filmed. I couldn't tell what the hell was going on and was trying to figure out what actually happened to his father. The whole movie was over-explained over and over except for the ending, which made no sense.

There aren't many movies, or genres, that I can't force my self to sit through if I have to. Never did I think that I would be bored watching a comic book action movie. If I wasn't with a group of friends, I would have left.

I think they could have done a lot better. The Hulk is a different kind of comic character. He's not a superhero. He's a victim...a tortured soul. He doesn't dress up and fight bad guys. Other than being chased by the government, there's no antagonist in the film, which was the main reason I find this film lacking.

The original trailers had me worried that the animation was going to ruin the movie. It was great in some parts, and other parts were a little worse. I think the close ups where the hulk isn't doing anything are great, but the desert scene where he's running and jumping was obviously animated (i know, duh) but didn't detract from the movie at all. Unfortunately, the story did.

Overall I would say the Hulk was a huge disappointment...if you're on the fence about seeing it and aren't a huge comic book fan, save your money and see something else.

 

[Stephen Orr]

At the 5.75 matinee price, I felt I paid way too much to see Hulk. I thought it had good action pieces, but felt the "drama" was pretentious and boring. And yes, I like thoughtful, thought-provoking films, but I thought Darkman was a better movie about dealing with anger and uncontrolled rage. Also, I thought the way the film when WAY out of its way to let us know that Hulk didn't kill anybody was cheesy and unnecessary.

 

[FredK]

The movie goes up to bat and hits the ball 525 ft... just foul.

The first 1/3 rolls with a visual intenstity and pace thats curious and exhilirating and that's just the setup, I would have given this movie perfect status after the first 45 minutes.

But then it suddenly drops the frentic styling and the the conversations become repetitive, it could be a shorter movie just by tightening the editing of the middle acts.

The last 1/3 was a little disjointed but contains the best comic to film scenes ever. The green guy on screen not only joins the ranks but surpasses the comic bliss of Supes flying or Peter Parker drawing his costume. He's in a new category of comic cool.

While I'm not as entertaining as X2 this movie is much more satisfying, it tries to be so much more and leaves us with some of the best and some of the worst.

:star: :star: :star: /4

But the effort and experience were even better than that. Worth the $35(married and hungry!).

 

[JonZ]

All the movies ive been to lately have been way to low.

During X-Men (in the same theater) I could hardly hear the movie over all the popcorn crunching and asked them to turn the volume up.


SPOILERS....

I wont go into a in depth review,I did enjoy it but I hated the end with the Hulk going up against Banners father.

:star: :star: :star: out of 4 :star:s

 

[TheLongshot]

Hulk: 7/10

Overall, I thought the movie was pretty good. Flawed in many ways, but it works for me. It helps if you go in thinking more "King Kong" and "Frankenstein" rather than "X-Men" or "Spider Man".

Pro:
Acting was pretty good all around. Bana was ok and the guy playing Talbot was a little arch, but most people played it well.

CGI/Action was top notch for the most part. A lot of fun.

Transitions: I actually liked them. A little overused, but when it worked, it really worked.

Con:
The slow beginning: It probably would have been better if they just did the "childhood" scenes as flashbacks and just started with Bruce at the lab. It just takes too long to get to the meat of the story.

The end: Looks like a studio concession, because it isn't consistant with the tone of the rest of the film. Way too over the top and silly.

Jason

 

[Hanson]

Ang Lee stick to Crouching Tigers.....

That movie had so much in common with the Hulk. You take a movie in a genre that's non-stop and funny and action packed and you make something so slow and boring that you check out well before anything interesting happens. How long did it take for the Hulk to show up? An hour? And how boring was that hour?

I though the CGI was pretty good. Actually it was really good -- compared to the Neo/Agent Smiths fight scene, the Hulk CGI stuff was head and shoulders above. And you could really see Eric Bana in the Hulk.

But the scenes themselves were misfires. Hulk Puppies? The Hulk is out and they send 3 tanks? Then five helicopters? So fricken' lame. Now that the CGI has upped the ante, can we get better action scenarists? We have come to a point where the CGI is better than the material. It's like watching DeNiro slumming it in Rocky & Bullwinkle.

Also surprising was that the best performance in the movie was from the Hulk. I mean, Bana was given nothing to do, but Connelly looked like she was sleepwalking while Nolte and Elliot were in a scenery chewing contest (Notle won, by the way). This always happens when a script spins it wheels in a belabored attempt to look like something substantial. We are given scenes with actors who have nothing to say. I would have preferred superhero hack work like Blade 2 to this enervated sleeping pill.

The only thing I liked was the casting of the younger Thunderbolt Ross and David Banner. Better than the job they did in ST:Nemesis.

Overall, the Hulk joyless and lacking in energy. I don't like it when it's very Ang Lee.

 

[Jim A. Banville]

I liked HULK very much! Yes, the film should have been sped up a little, and yes there are several "false endings" which should have been cut and put as extras on the DVD, but overall, I was satisfied No one else in my party liked it too much, but I don't care. They liked Spiderman, which I thought pretty much sucked, save for a few scenes, and was what I considered a movie aimed at teenagers. I think HULK was aimed at "thinking" adult sci-fi fans who realize that just because the title is HULK, it ain't supposed to be the EXACT same thing as the comic or TV show. It is someone's INTERPRETATION of the general idea. This film isn't aimed at a general audience who expects non-stop action with a rock n' roll soundtrack!

 

[Scott Thomas]

I just came backthe the 12:00 pm screen and came back both pleased and somewhat dissapointed.

I'll admit the first 40 minutes were slow, but the very first "HULK-out" and suddenly the whole theater began to get excited.
I loved the way the hulk looked and acted, You could tell that Ang Lee wanted to make the Hulk more of a victim than a monster. I thought he pulled it off perfectly
Also there was something about the way that the Hulk gently put Betty in her car before fighting those dogs. Plus the way that the Hulk would look at Betty with those sad, sad eyes of his.

I thought the comic book style was a little over-done but I liked the way it was played out.

Overall
****/*****

 

[Mikel_Cooperman]

It doesnt surprise me that the general public thinks theres too much talking and not enough action in this movie.
This is the MTV generation or rather the people that grew up on it.
I loved it for the very reasons that some people dont. That it got into characters and that it just didnt rush into Action. That it took time to establish characters. I think ppeople these days are used to fast cut, fast cut, fast cut that the general audiences need for their attention span. If there is more than ten minutes of character development or story they tune out.

I was so glad it was treated like a grownup movie as opposed to The Daredevil which was all fluff. Blaring Rock music, characters that werent developed in favor of kung fu fighting and horrible laughable dialouge.

The Hulk had Meat and Id say this is the thinking persons comic book movie. A movie is more about a man and the tragic things that happend to him. Its not suppose to be a kick ass superhero fight the villan movie. If anyone had read anything about the movie before hand, they would know that.

 

[Stephen_Dar]

I think you're being a little harsh, Mikel. I still think it's Hollywood that has got it wrong in the most serious areas. Sure, people will flock to see mindless crap, but I think it's clear they'll see other things too. We keep getting no-brain, all action crap like Armageddon and Pearl Harbor, despite the fact that things like Apocalypse Now Redux was selling out theaters here in LA and the Band of Brothers DVD was a best seller for quite a long time (I hope they recouped their money from that very detailed, involving story).

Anyway, I agree with most of the reviews here on Hulk. As my friend said at the end, it was like 2 movies, 1 that sucked (the drama) and one that was good (Hulk). The drama sucked not because it got in the way of action but because it was a muddle. What was the point of the drama supposed to be - that these guys were pushing into "forbidden" science that was dangerous? That this guy had problems relating to women? That he had lots of personal/family problems in his past? That his dad had done some very strange things years ago that had affected his son and now the consequences were catching up with Bruce? Any one of these, properly handled, could have been worthy foundations to lend heft to the Hulk story, but what we got was all of them muddled together.

As for Hulk, he looked great and there were wow moments, but at the same time I agree with some of the criticisms. Why did only 3 tanks go after him? Why was he allowed to come out of sedation at all when the general said he'd keep him sedated forever if necessary? Why would planes fire missiles at the golden gate bridge or anywhere else in the populated areas? Why was hulk shown in the middle of the desert, then suddenly he's in San Francisco which is no where near the desert? How could those helicopters possibly have crashed without killing anyone (those were moments of supreme silliness, I must say)? So, Hulk definitely was cool, looked cool, acted cool, the dog fight was great (of course, everyone in the bay area has a wonderful private cabin in the redwoods, those things are a dime a dozen), leaping through the desert looked great, better than I expected. I'd like to see some of those scenes again, but I have insufficient interest to ever want to buy the disk. My 2 cents.

 

[Patrick Sun]

Folks, this is the Review thread, not the discussion thread for the "Hulk" film. Do not post rebuttals and questions in this thread. Please use the Official Discussion Thread for the Hulk.