Bruce Banner: Sympathic Fugitive or Depressed Scientist?

[Stu]

Hey,

Anyone who has the slightest knowledge of comics will probably be aware of The Hulk's origin. In an attempt to save a young teenager, Rick Jones from being blasted by a gamma bomb, scientist Bruce Banner ran into the gamma bomb's test zone and was bombarbed with gamma rays. His selfless sacrafice meant turned him into a monster whenever he became angry or upset.

The 1990's animated Hulk series took this origin, and had Banner on the run whilst he searched for a cure to his condition. Ignore season two, you'll be better for it.

In light of the recent updated version of his origin in The Ultimate comic book, Bruce Banner's transformation into The Hulk was no one but his own. The usually sympathic scientist was now a jerk who couldn't come to turns with his inability to sucessfully re-produce the super soldier formula which created Captain America. Ultimate Avengers went one step forward and made it so Banner didn't really give a crap about getting a team of superhuman heroes for SHIELD - he wanted the formula so he control Hulk and be the super solder himself.

Which version do you prefer? What do you like and dislike about each version?


http://marvel.toonzone.net/mafeatures/ultavengers/media/screengrabs/174.jpg
Image Courtesty of Marvel Animation Age (http://marvel.toonzone.net)

[Arsenal]

I prefer the Ultimate version. For the Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde dynamic to work, you need a truly, despicable Mr. Hyde. The 616 Hulk gets too light and fuzzy. I want my Hulk MAD. I WANT HULK SMASH! I WANT HULK...

Excuse me, my train of thought derailed.

The Ultimate Hulk can be a hero or a villain. The Ultimate Banner can play either side of the fence, as well. He has more storytelling potential.

[ifthismeansevos]

I miss the old story, and I miss Rick I'm not sure why but I do. His origin is different from the rest you know Spidey can't save his uncle then he becomes Spider-man Punisher cant save his family, the same goes to Matt. Banner is succesful but he paid the price. Oh´c'mon am I the only one who loves the good-heart heroes?

[RAINMAN]

I`ll go whit the 616 one. Althougth U hulk does have a good orgine.

[HellCat]

I personally enjoy the classic Banner, the guy who ends up becoming the Hulk accidently and only wants to go back to normal. The first season of the 90's show handled that angle quite well.

[Wonderwall]

My instinct is to go opposite anything Ultimate. However I feel Ultiamte Bruce banner is as interesting as 616 Bruce banner. I like 616 Hulk much better than Ultimate Hulk, mainly due to the unnecessary pc references, vulgar dialogue, and full blown murderer. 616 Hulk isnt trying to kill anyone but sometimes does, happens when you can level a building with your fists. So by that logic I still prefer 616 Bruce banner more, hes still an interesting character that you play different angles off of because hes so damaged. And really Ultimate Bruce Banner is just a jerk...who isnt in the Ultimate universe..so he loses points for unoriginality.

[ifthismeansevos]

Yep I hate the UFF so much, and the X-men aren't very good for me. Oh no I'm a Ultimate hater!!! At least I like Captain America and sometimes Daredevil. and the UA movie. I don't know Banner was creepy anyway.

[Dogbert]

It's 616 Banner/Hulk all the way for me. At the end of the day, Hulk is a super hero and I want a super hero that I can tolerate. I'm not saying Hulk needs to be perfect, obviously that wouldn't work. I'm just say I'm not interested in reading about or watching a hero that I dislike (I'm suddenly having flashbacks to the time my brother forced me to watch House).

Now, I'm not a big fan of the Ultimate stories (or change of any kind for that matter), so my opinion is probably also a reaction to the change in general. However, I can say that the Ultimate Hulk is the one change I strongly dislike.

One other thing that probably belongs in this discussion: David Bruce Banner. The live-action TV show from the 70s had a different origin story as well. No Rick to save, just David (allegedly, the name Bruce was too "gay" in the opinion of the TV show creators) wanting to research miraculous bursts of super human strength. His rush leading to experimenting on himself was caused by his guilt over his inability to save his wife from a burning vehicle, so his motives were a little less pure than 616's Banner. However, his kind heart still made you love the guy (and the ranging spirit that dwelled within him). In fact, his great concern that he might hurt someone was a great quality. For example, when he thought that the Hulk had killed someone, he almost committed suicide (both as a self-inflicted punishment to end his guilt and to make sure it never happened again). This Banner/Hulk was very different from the 616 version, but still kept the qualities that made him likable. That is how I think all revamps should be done (if they really need to be done at all).

Which brings up my last thought for this post... Why even call the Ultimate version Bruce Banner? If they're going to change a character that much, why not just invent a new one. They could still use "The Hulk" as the name of the monster he changes into, as we've seen different Hulks before. In fact, the new Hulk person might have a bigger following if he wasn't constantly compared to the original. My answer to the question: to capitalize off the legacy of a character without actually respecting his legacy.

I must be watching too much of The Colbert Report because for some reason I feel like ending this post/rant with "and that's the word."

[RAINMAN]

You think U hulk/bruce origine is different from the original? Try finding out the other origines of the rest of U,marvel heroies.:sad:

[ifthismeansevos]

I'm not a big reader of the U comics but I hate the origin of the FF in that universe and it's just me or Van Damme and Gah-lak-tus are the stupidest thing you ever heard?

[Spider-Man]

Isn't he both a sympathetic fugitive and a depressed scientist? Those traits seem to go hand in hand with some of the characterizations of The Hulk. I really don't know what the best portrayal is. I like Hulk as a hero that we usually see in the mainstream comics and the cartoons but I also don't mind him being a brutal force or nature and pretty much the enemy of The Avengers.

[redlion]

I'm an old school fan, so naturally I'm more partial to the classic origin of the Hulk. I loved how through no fault of his own Doc Banner, through a tragic set of circumstances and a selfless act of courage, becomes the Hulk due to Rick's carelessness. I've always thought that this was what made him a true hero and set him apart from most other superheroes' origins.

I admit, I'm not too familiar with his Ultimate origin so this is probably my least favorite version of Banner/Hulk. However, I enjoyed the animated feature's rendition of Dr. Banner/Hulk. I've always felt that prolonged exposure to continuously becoming the Hulk, and having very little control, would eventually lead Banner into a state depression. It just seemed a natural progression.

[screw on head]

I really enjoyed the Banner we got in Ultimate Avengers. I think overall he was the most effective both design and writing wise out of the cast, not to mention that Michael Massee was fantasticly cast. I loved the drowsy, dazed quality of his voice. Visually he works just as well as Massee's performance... I really liked that his labcoat was a bit murkier than everyone else's, and that his glasses had that smoggy green tint to them reminiscent of The Hulk. I'm really looking forward to what's to come for him in the film's sequel...

[Nightwing]

For My Hulk, I want this:


I'm an old school fan, so naturally I'm more partial to the classic origin of the Hulk. I loved how through no fault of his own Doc Banner, through a tragic set of circumstances and a selfless act of courage, becomes the Hulk due to Rick's carelessness. I've always thought that this was what made him a true hero and set him apart from most other superheroes' origins.

And this, which is more or less the same deal:



One other thing that probably belongs in this discussion: David Bruce Banner. The live-action TV show from the 70s had a different origin story as well. No Rick to save, just David (allegedly, the name Bruce was too "gay" in the opinion of the TV show creators) wanting to research miraculous bursts of super human strength. His rush leading to experimenting on himself was caused by his guilt over his inability to save his wife from a burning vehicle, so his motives were a little less pure than 616's Banner. However, his kind heart still made you love the guy (and the ranging spirit that dwelled within him). In fact, his great concern that he might hurt someone was a great quality. For example, when he thought that the Hulk had killed someone, he almost committed suicide (both as a self-inflicted punishment to end his guilt and to make sure it never happened again). This Banner/Hulk was very different from the 616 version, but still kept the qualities that made him likable. That is how I think all revamps should be done (if they really need to be done at all).

The depression thing and wanting to control the Hulk is cool, but it just seems weird because the Ultimate Avengers movie is the first exposure I've had to Ultimate Hulk, so seeing his motives and stuff was a bit offsetting.



Which brings up my last thought for this post... Why even call the Ultimate version Bruce Banner? If they're going to change a character that much, why not just invent a new one. They could still use "The Hulk" as the name of the monster he changes into, as we've seen different Hulks before. In fact, the new Hulk person might have a bigger following if he wasn't constantly compared to the original. My answer to the question: to capitalize off the legacy of a character without actually respecting his legacy.

Does anyone know why I didn't think of this? I'm the only one who would know, because it's my brain, and I'm baffled. That would have fit really well, if they did that.

Maybe they just wanted the squeeling fanboy factor brought on by the fans hearing the guy's name.

[Robin2099]

Personally, I've always preferred Hulk the way he was portrayed in the Bill Bixby tv series, and the 90's animated series.

[ifthismeansevos]

My first impression of the U Hulk was the movie but when I get some back issues of the Ultimates he just fell from grace. as almost everyone. I don't know why I don't like the UU but I just don't like it.

[Spider-Man]

The depression thing and wanting to control the Hulk is cool, but it just seems weird because the Ultimate Avengers movie is the first exposure I've had to Ultimate Hulk, so seeing his motives and stuff was a bit offsetting. Does anyone know why I didn't think of this? I'm the only one who would know, because it's my brain, and I'm baffled. That would have fit really well, if they did that. Maybe they just wanted the squeeling fanboy factor brought on by the fans hearing the guy's name.
The character they had in Ultimate Avengers was The Hulk to me. It was just a different version of the character. The Hulk has changed so many times throughout his creation than just about any interpreation of Bruce Banner is valid to me. Everyone has their own interpreations of Marvel characters. Batman, Spider-Man, X-Men, and countless others have been done in different ways over the years. So what makes the different portrayals of the Hulk so different or special than any of the others?

[Nightwing]

The character they had in Ultimate Avengers was The Hulk to me. It was just a different version of the character. The Hulk has changed so many times throughout his creation than just about any interpreation of Bruce Banner is valid to me. Everyone has their own interpreations of Marvel characters. Batman, Spider-Man, X-Men, and countless others have been done in different ways over the years. So what makes the different portrayals of the Hulk so different or special than any of the others?

Absolutely. Variety is the most delicious dish life has to offer. At the same time, however, I keep in mind that there's this core human being with specific pains that we relate to most, in each character. With Bruce Banner, I seem to like the fugitive one. He did everything in his power to do the right thing, and yet he's still shunned by an entire world of idiots.

[Spider-Man]

Absolutely. Variety is the most delicious dish life has to offer. At the same time, however, I keep in mind that there's this core human being with specific pains that we relate to most, in each character. With Bruce Banner, I seem to like the fugitive one. He did everything in his power to do the right thing, and yet he's still shunned by an entire world of idiots.
But at the core aren't don't we have the same basic problem with Hulk and how he's basically suffering because of the Hulk. Whether it's him on the run and wanting to be alone or having the Hulk be responsible for releasing his basic animal instincts? Variety is the spice but I think they've managed to keep the core of Banner intact. Do you (or anyone reading this) think that there's a difference in Banner's suffering depending on how Hulk is portrayed?

[ifthismeansevos]

Well maybe his own feeling of guilty in the U He did that to himself it has to be more painful than the original accident even if itr's less ironic.

[Spider-Man]

Well maybe his own feeling of guilty in the U He did that to himself it has to be more painful than the original accident even if itr's less ironic.
I think that his origin in the mainstream universe is a bit more tragic while the one in the Ultimate universe is a bit more ironic. Everything he became int he Ultimate universe he did to himself with his past fueling just how big of a monster he became. In the mainstream one he tried to hide so much about his past but when he got hit by those rays it just overwhelmed his system. I guess the question now is which one do fans prefer?

The origin that resulted in him trying to save his life or the origin resulted from his suffering a result of his own hand.