The Official "The Incredible Hulk" News & Discussion Thread (Possible Spoilers)

[Cortez2301]

Please use this thread for all news/speculation about 2008's The Incredible Hulk!

Director Louis Leterrier is directing The Incredible Hulk, Marvel's sequel to the 2003 movie, Hulk. The movie, which begins filming in April 2007, which be a 'do over' of the original, or 'Hulk-lite'. The villain of the movie has already been revealed in The Abomination.

Comments?

Note: Please keep this topic, and the discussion found within, on-topic. Thank you.

[Icer]

Abomination is a great villain for the Hulk, should be a huge opportunity for a good ol Hulk Smash slug-fest with him.

[Cortez2301]

But I'm more interested in seeing how Favreau will handle Iron man's Mandarin.It will probably be amazing.

[Hades]

I'll check out the Iron Man movie, but I will pass on another Hulkl movie. The first one was bad enough.

[Anarky]

I'll check out the Iron Man movie, but I will pass on another Hulkl movie. The first one was bad enough.

if its of any consolation to ya: Universal, Ang Lee, and Eric bana will have nothing to do w/ the next HULK pic. The sequel rights expired and were tranferred back to Marvel so they'dl be developing this film...and be more faithful to the comics. You read an excerpt from an interview w/ Avi Arad I believe. I don't have a link for you though. You could try SHH first.

[MR.MXYZPTLK]

But I'm more interested in seeing how Favreau will handle Iron man's Mandarin.It will probably be amazing.

I agree, it could make for some amazing fight scenes! I can't wait to see Iron Mans glining armour in the sky!

Hulk should be good to. Though a bit confusing to some I expect. Still, abomination is a cool villain. They better get his visual right...

[Stu]

Actually, no one is quite sure if Eric Bana will be returning yet or not. He's stated that he would like to, but no one seems to know for sure yet. They start filming in April 2007.

Apprantly, General Ross will return. From the sounds of it, Jennifer Connely won't be returning as Betty, which dissapoints me. I thought she was one of the better parts of the first movie. This isn't confirmed yet though. I hope they manage to get the cast back together for this sequel.

I've changed this to a The Incredible Hulk thread, since we already have an Iron Man one. Hope no one minds!

[The Weed Of Cri]

Favreau will have to tread lightly with this decision. Hollywood PC being what it is, there will surely be complaints about using a "yellow peril" stereotype as a villian.

I'm gratified to learn that the producers of the new Hulk movie are going back to the comic book roots, rather than the TV show. I think it's a step in the right direction, and I'm looking forward to seeing the result.

[ManicWebb]

As someone who was never a fan of the Hulk (not even the comics), I'm looking forward to this new Hulk movie less than I did the first Hulk movie.

I agree that Favreau made a tricky decision with the Mandarin. Thanks to unregulated racism and the yellow peril fear caused by waves of Chinese immigrants during the mid 19th to early 20th centuries, writers weren't afraid to make their supervillains as stereotypically Chinese as possible (Ming from Flash Gordon, Fu Manchu, the original Buck Rogers stories where China had taken over the world).

Of course, tha Mandarin is half-English, and isn't a representative of the Chinese people, because quite frankly, he tried to subjugate his own people.

[Stu]

Ed Norton has now been cast as Bruce Banner in The Incredible Hulk, according to Superhero Hype (http://www.superherohype.com/news/topnews.php?id=5502)

Comments?

[BCVM22]

Ed Norton has now been cast as Bruce Banner in The Incredible Hulk, according to Superhero Hype (http://www.superherohype.com/news/topnews.php?id=5502)

Comments?

Didn't see that coming.

[Wonderwall]

Ed Norton has now been cast as Bruce Banner in The Incredible Hulk, according to Superhero Hype (http://www.superherohype.com/news/topnews.php?id=5502)

Comments?

Whoa talk about out of nowhere. Im a big Ed Nortan fan, When he's on, he is an amazing actor, and even when he phones it in, he's still pretty good. SHould be intersting to see him as Banner.

[Azrael24]

Um...you guys know this ISNT a sequel, right? Marvel is trying to re-do the hulk after that...."movie"

[Cortez2301]

Weird I don't remember starting this thread especially with those words I apparently used...Anyway I think Edward Norton will be a good choice for The Hulk.Now that I think about it,I think Norton should be Iron man and Robert Downey jr. should be Bruce Banner.Just a thought.

[The Avatar]

Hope its better then the first one. If nothing else, it should at least be shorter.

[sdp]

hmm...was I the only one that liked the original movie?

I'm only a very small marvel fan, even less a Hulk fan but I enjoyed it and wanted more movies on that continuity.

I feel this sequel would bomb, people just don't care about the Hulk.

[The Penguin]

Um...you guys know this ISNT a sequel, right? Marvel is trying to re-do the hulk after that...."movie"

Weird I don't remember starting this thread especially with those words I apparently used...Anyway I think Edward Norton will be a good choice for The Hulk.Now that I think about it,I think Norton should be Iron man and Robert Downey jr. should be Bruce Banner.Just a thought.Well regardless of how the thread got the title it did, I believe the film title is pretty much set at this point so I changed the thread.

[JustJack]

hmm...was I the only one that liked the original movie?

I'm only a very small marvel fan, even less a Hulk fan but I enjoyed it and wanted more movies on that continuity.

I feel this sequel would bomb, people just don't care about the Hulk.

You're not the only one. I liked the first Hulk....kinda. I enjoy it BECAUSE it's the Hulk. In reality, it's one hell of a god awful film. Talk about getting all the worst people for everything. Ang Lee was a terrible choice for director. The script was terrible -why a chick flick? WHY?? Eric Bana (who, I add, IS a fantastic actor) was a bad choice for Banner (he's got abs...AB'S!). Overall, a terrible Hulk film.
I am a Hulk fan, and as a hulk fan don't want to see another "Hulk: Chick Flick" film. Hulk is the greatest opportunity for a stylish action film, and they took a dramatic route? It was as if everyone involved had no idea it was about a big green angry monster man.

This sequel will SHINE I tells you...SHINE! I do think people care about Hulk...he's a big piece of our pop culture. Everyone know's Hulk. Furthermore, this next film has a good choice for director (a guy who actually directs ACTION movies! WOO!), a real villian (Abomination vs. Hulk will be awesome), and now a great choice for Banner.

Which brings me to the addition of Edward Norton to the film. I found this one out last night with my girlfriend. Now, I'm more use to Norton's geeky characters whereas my girlfriend has only seen him in American History X and Fight Club. She was kind of shocked and a little weirded out to think of him as Bruce Banner, but I think he's a fantastic choice. He's perfectly nerdy, but has the acting chops and attitude to pull of "you wouldn't like me when I'm angry." I'm all in for this next flick. All in.

[Young Justice]

You're not the only one. I liked the first Hulk....kinda. I enjoy it BECAUSE it's the Hulk. In reality, it's one hell of a god awful film. Talk about getting all the worst people for everything. Ang Lee was a terrible choice for director. The script was terrible -why a chick flick? WHY?? Eric Bana (who, I add, IS a fantastic actor) was a bad choice for Banner (he's got abs...AB'S!). Overall, a terrible Hulk film.
I am a Hulk fan, and as a hulk fan don't want to see another "Hulk: Chick Flick" film. Hulk is the greatest opportunity for a stylish action film, and they took a dramatic route? It was as if everyone involved had no idea it was about a big green angry monster man.

I completely agree with you. The previous Hulk movie was not bad, but could be a lot better. The best part of the previous movie was when they nod to comics by turning Bruce's father into the Absorbing Man. I hope to see more of that in this new movie. Especially if it was about the Leader.

What I liked about the previous movie was the actual use of comic panels on screen. When you think about it, this seems kinda obvious, but no other director had used that feature in comic book movies before.



This sequel will SHINE I tells you...SHINE! I do think people care about Hulk...he's a big piece of our pop culture. Everyone know's Hulk. Furthermore, this next film has a good choice for director (a guy who actually directs ACTION movies! WOO!), a real villian (Abomination vs. Hulk will be awesome), and now a great choice for Banner.

Which brings me to the addition of Edward Norton to the film. I found this one out last night with my girlfriend. Now, I'm more use to Norton's geeky characters whereas my girlfriend has only seen him in American History X and Fight Club. She was kind of shocked and a little weirded out to think of him as Bruce Banner, but I think he's a fantastic choice. He's perfectly nerdy, but has the acting chops and attitude to pull of "you wouldn't like me when I'm angry." I'm all in for this next flick. All in.

I just hope that the movie doesn't end as a reboot for this franchise. You can't have a movie and 5 years after, do a reboot. I hope this movie is a do-over in terms of concept but not chronology. If this is a reboot it will confuse a lot of viewers, hence increasing the probability of commercial failure.

[Azrael24]

It's not a sequel!!

[Young Justice]

It's not a sequel!!

But it will tell again the origin of Hulk? Or it will continue from a non specified chronology, similar to what they did with Superman Returns?

[Azrael24]

But it will tell again the origin of Hulk? Or it will continue from a non specified chronology, similar to what they did with Superman Returns?
From what ive read on comingsoon.net is that this is not a sequel to the Hulk movie, it will have its own continuity, which i'm glad of but i think its much too early to start

[Anarky]

casting ed norton should score lots of positive buzz from the haters of the first film. norton is well respected. btw, excellent timing: father's day wkd

[JustJack]

I just hope that the movie doesn't end as a reboot for this franchise. You can't have a movie and 5 years after, do a reboot. I hope this movie is a do-over in terms of concept but not chronology. If this is a reboot it will confuse a lot of viewers, hence increasing the probability of commercial failure.

Indeed, Marvel would be making a big mistake with a reboot.

It shouldn't be too tough to just start off with Banner on the run, trying to get a grip on his curse or finding a way to rid himself of the Green Meany. Personally I think this would be a great opportunity to throw Doc Samson into Marvel Movie history as the last scientist Banner can turn towards to help find a cure, but I think I'm dreaming too much, there.

With the first movie, and 40+ years of Hulk being a pop culture icon, and the publics general knowledge of "gamma radiation", I think it'll be easy to just not mention the first movie and get right into the thick of things.

[ShadowGUN]

LIV TYLER IS BETTY ROSS (http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=111370)

[Young Justice]

LIV TYLER IS BETTY ROSS (http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=111370)

For what I've read in this news, this new Hulk movie will start loosely when the other one finished: Banner is already Hulk and he is on the run, escaping from the authorities.

The recasting of actors is to stress that the concpet line of the franchise has been changed.

[JustJack]

LIV TYLER IS BETTY ROSS (http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=111370)

Nice choice....though I can never get than line from Clerks: Animated out of my head.

Randal: Hey, if you were the lead singer of Aerosmith, and could get any chick in the universe, who would you pick?
Dante: I don't know...
Randal: I'd get that Liv Tyler chick...she's hot.:D

[ShadowGUN]

Tim Roth is Emil Blonsky/the Abomination. (http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=112036)

[JabarR]

I wonder if they'll have the She-Hulk in this one.

[Young Justice]

Tim Roth is Emil Blonsky/the Abomination. (http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=112036)

I think the Leader would be a much more interesting villain for the Hulk with Abomination working as Leader's muscle worker.

Alan Rickman could be an interesting Leader, altough he is tall.

[James]

I wonder if they'll have the She-Hulk in this one.

I think we can safely say no on that.

It's a shame Bana's not back, but this seems a sensible - and becoming frequent - movie choice in bringing a franchise away from past scorn.

I imagine, as with Superman Returns, you'll have a film which flows on from a sequel, but is a reboot in its own right; you know the origin story runs parallel to the first film, but tone, actors and visuals don't remain a constant, nor does the film use the original as a crutch. That's how I imagine this will work. A bit like how Batman Forever is a continuation from Batman Returns, but actually holds no real ties to the former.

[Young Justice]

I imagine, as with Superman Returns, you'll have a film which flows on from a sequel, but is a reboot in its own right; you know the origin story runs parallel to the first film, but tone, actors and visuals don't remain a constant, nor does the film use the original as a crutch. That's how I imagine this will work. A bit like how Batman Forever is a continuation from Batman Returns, but actually holds no real ties to the former.

But Batman Forever did actually mentioned Catwoman from Batman Returns and Joker from Batman. And there were a few actors that remained the same like Alfred and Commisioner Gordon.

Let's see if this new Hulk movie will mention something that happened in the previous movie and if some actors remains the same. I sincerely hope that Sam Elliot remains as Gen. Ross.

[Silly McGooses]

I think Batman Forever is a good example, though. The brief Catwoman references and the handful of leftover actors were the only links to a much, much different first two films.

[Spider-Man]

Universal Studios has released the synopsis for the movie:


The explosive, action-packed adventure in one of the all-time most popular superhero sagas unfolds with a cure in reach for the world's most primal force of fury: The Incredible Hulk. We find scientist Bruce Banner (Edward Norton) living in shadows, scouring the planet for an antidote. But the warmongers who dream of abusing his powers won't leave him alone, nor will his need to be with the only woman he has ever loved, Betty Ross (Liv Tyler).

"Upon returning to civilization, our brilliant doctor is ruthlessly pursued by The Abomination (Tim Roth) -- a nightmarish beast of pure adrenaline and aggression whose powers match The Hulk's own. A fight of comic-book proportions ensues as Banner must call upon the hero within to rescue New York City from total destruction. And on June 13, 2008, one scientist must make an agonizing final choice -- accept a peaceful life as Bruce Banner or the creature he could permanently become: The Incredible Hulk."

Production of the film -- written by Zak Penn and directed by Louis Leterrier -- is expected to start next month in Toronto.

[Young Justice]

http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=272999

In this thread is not stated where the original in french was published.

[Spider-Man]

This update was posted on Coming Soon! (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=20991).


Oscar winner William Hurthas joined the all-star cast of Marvel Studios' The Incredible Hulk.

The movie, which Louis Leterrier is directing, sees Bruce Banner/Hulk on the run, trying to avoid capture long enough to cure the condition that turns him into a monster. Hurt will play Gen. Thaddeus "Thunderbolt" Ross, the man who has dedicated his life to capturing the Hulk -- and who also is the father of Banner's love interest, Betty Ross.

"Hulk" is shaping up to having one of the stronger comic book movie casts in quite a while as Hurt joins two-time Oscar nominee Edward Norton, who is playing Banner, Liv Tyler as Betty and Tim Roth as villain Emil Blonsky/the Abomination.

Zak Penn wrote the latest big-screen adventure of the green goliath, which Universal Pictures is distributing.

The film is being produced by Avi Arad, Gale Anne Hurd and Kevin Feige, while Jim Van Wyck, David Maisel, Ari Arad and Stan Lee executive produce. Shooting is slated to begin this summer in Toronto.

[Young Justice]

http://wizarduniverse.com/_images_/004902/HulkPoster.jpg (http://wizarduniverse.com/_images_/004902/HulkPoster.jpg)

http://www.wizarduniverse.com/magazine/toyfare/004902727.cfm

[JustJack]

http://wizarduniverse.com/_images_/004902/HulkPoster.jpg (http://wizarduniverse.com/_images_/004902/HulkPoster.jpg)

http://www.wizarduniverse.com/magazine/toyfare/004902727.cfm


Mmm..so much better than the lame tease from the first flick. Here's hoping one of the posters has Hulk carrying giant rocky-letters of "Incredible Hulk" on his back...loved those comic covers.

[Stu]

Very good poster. I'm actually quite looking forward to this one, the original had a decent film in there somewhere but was lost amongst a sea of horrendously pointless scenes and a confusing, unneccesary subpplot with David Banner.

Dissapointed about the recasting, but you can't win them all.

[Jacob T. Paschal]

http://wizarduniverse.com/_images_/004902/HulkPoster.jpg (http://wizarduniverse.com/_images_/004902/HulkPoster.jpg)

http://www.wizarduniverse.com/magazine/toyfare/004902727.cfm

I'm glad I wasn't wearing any pants when I saw that.


Very good looking, not too big, not too small.

[Young Justice]

I'm brazilian and I read in a local newspaper this news:


Hulk is coming

If you thought that the Rio de Janeiro slum, Tavares Bastos, in Catete, was already crowded with the Torto residents, prepare yourself for new emotions. The place, which is the scenario for the shootings of the brazillian "Vidas Opostas" soap opera, will be soon, the place for shooting the "Hulk" sequel. Two profissionals in charge of the production already visited the area.

- The director (Louis Leterrier) and the producer came by to see the locations of the neighborhood.

And they liked Rio very much - said the producer Roberto Beiker, from Zohar Productions, who is doing the bridge between the Brazillian community and the professionals from the movie.

But how Rio de Janeiro gets into the plot? Who saw the first movie probably remember the scientist Bruce Banner appeared, in the final scene, doctoring people in a rain forest. In this new movie, Hulk will be hidden in the slum, escaping from the military who wish to capture him. While he is on the run, he tries to find a cure for his transformation. The shootings on Tavares Bastos slum should start in October, after the ones that will take place in Canada, next month. The cast of the "Hulk" sequel will be Edward Norton (Bruce), Live Tyler (Betty Ross) and Tim Roth (Abomination).

I translated the piece from the original in portuguese:
http://extra.globo.com/lazer/sessaoExtra/post.asp?cod_Post=59007

[Jacob T. Paschal]

I'm brazilian and I read in a local newspaper this news:



I translated the piece from the original in portuguese:
http://extra.globo.com/lazer/sessaoExtra/post.asp?cod_Post=59007

Sounds like this would make a killer opening scene.

[Silly McGooses]

Looks like there are ties to the original, then...

[ShadowGUN]

Tim Blake Nelson is the Leader. I would post a link but Newsarama is having trouble with the article's link.

[Young Justice]

Tim Blake Nelson is the Leader. I would post a link but Newsarama is having trouble with the article's link.

I'm happy that Leader was chosen to be in a Hulk movie. I've always considered him as the ultimate Hulk arch-enemy. I just don't see this actor as the Leader. Let's see how he pull this off.

Tim Blake Nelson link in IMDB:
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0625789/

[Tash]

I'm happy that Leader was chosen to be in a Hulk movie. I've always considered him as the ultimate Hulk arch-enemy. I just don't see this actor as the Leader. Let's see how he pull this off.

Tim Blake Nelson link in IMDB:
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0625789/
Well, Marvel movies have made even stranger castings work. (Remember everyone's initial reaction to the guy who was playing Eddie Brock?)

[Spider-Man]

IESB (http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3381&Itemid=99) says that Hulk fans should be really pleased with the movie. They have a host of spoilers about the movie's plot and it sounds pretty excellent. I think The Incredible Hulk is shaping up to be a pretty excellent movie.

[Hanshotfirst113]

I'll check out the Iron Man movie, but I will pass on another Hulk movie. The first one was bad enough.

Different team entirely this time around.


Didn't see that coming.

Yeah, but I suppose that he's a logical choice; I can definately see him in that role. I think that he'd fit reasonably well.


It's not a sequel!!

We've got it.


I wonder if they'll have the She-Hulk in this one.

Please god no.


It's a shame Bana's not back, but this seems a sensible - and becoming frequent - movie choice in bringing a franchise away from past scorn.

Yes, normally, the idea is to keep the team, but since the film didn't do well, I'm guessing their rebuilding from scratch. Whatever I think of it, it makes sense.

[Azrael24]

I posted that eternities ago ^^, u shudnt have brought it up

[Hanshotfirst113]

Oh. Sorry. Someone must've bumped the thread.

[Young Justice]

Originally Posted by Azrael24

It's not a sequel!!

We've got it.


I call this movie something like a loose sequel. It would not follow directly where the last one finished, but it would not contradict anything the previous movie showed.

For instance, Gleen Talbot was killed in the last movie. I doubt he would appear in this one. The Hulk origin was told in the last movie, in this one, Bruce is already Hulk and will not have an origin. In the last movie, Bruce is last seen in a Latin-American Spanish speaking country, fighting terrorists. In this one, the movie starts in the slums of Brazil.

If I had to choose to call it a reboot or a sequel I call it a sequel. Even if all the actors and the director have changed.

[Jacob T. Paschal]

I call this movie something like a loose sequel. It would not follow directly where the last one finished, but it would not contradict anything the previous movie showed.

For instance, Gleen Talbot was killed in the last movie. I doubt he would appear in this one. The Hulk origin was told in the last movie, in this one, Bruce is already Hulk and will not have an origin. In the last movie, Bruce is last seen in a Latin-American Spanish speaking country, fighting terrorists. In this one, the movie starts in the slums of Brazil.

If I had to choose to call it a reboot or a sequel I call it a sequel. Even if all the actors and the director have changed.

I'd call it more of a 'we haven't shown you the origin, but you can probably figure it out for yourself' like in Superman Returns.

[stwasm]

Looks like there are ties to the original, then...

Hopefully, it won't suck like the original.

[Young Justice]

I'd call it more of a 'we haven't shown you the origin, but you can probably figure it out for yourself' like in Superman Returns.

Comparing to Superman Returns it's exactly my point to call this new movie as a loose sequel. Superman Returns didn't show the Superman origin, but it was far from a reboot. There were a lot of artistic and story elements from Superman 1 and 2.

I think the same will happen with this new movie. It would have different actors, different director, different story and art approach, but the story will follow where the last one ended.

I looks like when a writer and an artist leave a comic book replaced by another creative team. The story goes on, but the approach either in story and visual is different.

[Azrael24]

Hopefully, it won't suck like the original.
yup

and the thing about superman is, is that everyone already knows his origin, or at least ninety percent of the population whereas not too many people really know hulk's origin

[wonderfly]

superherohype.com (http://www.superherohype.com/imageGallery/Hulk/The_Incredible_Hulk/The_Movie/Movie_Stills) has a couple new photos from the upcoming Hulk movie, one of which I think is just awesome:

http://www.superherohype.com/gallery/Hulk/The_Incredible_Hulk/The_Movie/Movie_Stills/Movie_Stills_2.jpg

What a wonderful tribute to the old TV series! But are they retelling the origin of his Gamma powers? Or is this a scene of Banner trying to cure his condition?!?

[Young Justice]

superherohype.com (http://www.superherohype.com/imageGallery/Hulk/The_Incredible_Hulk/The_Movie/Movie_Stills) has a couple new photos from the upcoming Hulk movie, one of which I think is just awesome:

http://www.superherohype.com/gallery/Hulk/The_Incredible_Hulk/The_Movie/Movie_Stills/Movie_Stills_2.jpg

What a wonderful tribute to the old TV series! But are they retelling the origin of his Gamma powers? Or is this a scene of Banner trying to cure his condition?!?

It could be that or a flashback scene about his origins.

[James]

If it is a flashback, we can say goodbye to the loose continuity with the first film (which I'm sure was confirmed as the intent in some article I read), as this would very much take the story back to its televisual roots - which isn't a bad thing, both as a worthy piece of homage and a fresh start.

That said, depending on your demands of comic integrity, it does shift the film away from the comic motivations (Bruce's tragedy being born from his desire to protect others rather than an obsessive compulsive need to unlock the gamma mystery).

Of course, this speculation is all based on simple, possibly inaccurate observations of one photo - but isn't that the fun of speculation?

However it pops up, I'm thrilled with the TV homage there.

[Young Justice]

If it is a flashback, we can say goodbye to the loose continuity with the first film (which I'm sure was confirmed as the intent in some article I read),

I wouldn't quite say it's a sure thing that we can say goodbye to the loose continuity. Just because it will show the origin differently, it doesn't mean that we can't assume that the events of the 1st movie happened almost in the way they did.

My strongest point about it is Glenn Talbot. He is a major character in the Hulk mythos. If this movie is a sort of reboot, Talbot would appear, but I think he will not, tying closer to the 1st movie (in which he died).

Another fact that makes the two movie together is the end of the 1st and the beginning of the 2nd. The both parts take place in South America: in the 1st Bruce ends fighting some soldiers in an unnamed South American nation, and in the 2nd he appears hiding from the US Government in the Brazilian slums.

But this all speculation, let's wait and see. I myself prefer the loose continuity: Don't be restricted by the 1st movie, but don't deny it (much) either.

[Spider-Man]

A couple new pictures have shown up on www.empireonline.com (http://www.empireonline.com):

http://www.empireonline.com/images/cover/large/1.jpg
http://www.empireonline.com/images/cover/large/1.jpg

http://www.empireonline.com/images/cover/large/2.jpg
http://www.empireonline.com/images/cover/large/2.jpg

I wonder why we havne't seen an actual picture of the hulk. They must be saving that for the trailer next month.

[ShadowGUN]

Wanna see the trailer for the Incredible Hulk? Then tune in at MTV tommorrow night, right before the Gaunlet begins. And here a sneak peek (http://blog.newsarama.com/2008/03/11/tease-me-please-me-not-the-full-hulk-trailer/).

[tb4000]

And of course, MSN Latino has it earlier than all of us.

http://entretenimiento.prodigy.msn.com/cine/vfeed-hulk.aspx?cp-documentid=6483468&wa=wsignin1.0

[Silly McGooses]

Eeeeh...I actually liked Ang Lee's Hulk quite a bit, I'm not sure what I think of that trailer. Could be good, I guess.

[Robin2099]

Looks more like a big screen version of the TV series which I'm all for.

[Michael24]

That two-minute trailer, which I first saw tonight during a commercial break, was more exciting than the entire first movie. Finally, The Hulk actually looks, you know... cool!

Between, this and Iron Man (and maybe The Dark Knight), it could be a good summer for superhero flicks. :)

[ShadowGUN]

Great trailer.
http://www.newsarama.com/movies/Hulk/t_HulkTrailer_Picture16.jpg (http://www.newsarama.com/movies/Hulk/HulkTrailer_Picture16.jpg)

Hulk looks a bit skinny thougth. Anyway it looks great.

[EinBebop]

Didnt' see anythign at that MSN site, but here's a trailer link I got from serve with chips:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v66jXKbfgJY

[James]

Loved it. Norton is perfect and I am very happy with the TV show homages (the eye changes, the lab chair and on the website I notice they are using the opening chords of "lonely man"). Looking forward to it!

[Batman]

The Hulk looks INCREDIBLE , so much better than the first movie version .

[Hanshotfirst113]

That two-minute trailer, which I first saw tonight during a commercial break, was more exciting than the entire first movie. Finally, The Hulk actually looks, you know... cool!

Between, this and Iron Man (and maybe The Dark Knight), it could be a good summer for superhero flicks. :)

Um, how exactly did you forget Hellboy II: The Golden Army? Can we see geek heaven this summer? Oh, and Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull too, I suppose ;).

On to the Hulk, it's great to see the Abomination! The hulk himself doesn't look quite as great as he did in Lee's film, but the lanky, more lean look is cool all the same, and probably necessary for the fight scenes. Norton is probably about as good a choice as any, I suppose. It's Louis Leterrier that has me a bit shaky, but he does continue the trend of trusting comic-book movies to up-and-comers. I don't think that he's ever handled anything on a budget of this size, so it'll be interesting to see how he handles it. If nothing else, Transporter 2 shows that he knows his way around an action set piece, though he's going to have to make due without Corey Yuen Kwai's action choreography this time out ;). I'll give it a shot. Not a bad trailer. Shows little of the money shots, which seems disappointing, but is probably a good thing. Guess we'll find out. The idea of the Abomination is the one that has me most excited, actually. Seeing two Hulk-sized monster fight it out show make for some awesome work if the director handles it well!

[EinBebop]

Um, how exactly did you forget Hellboy II: The Golden Army? Can we see geek heaven this summer?The superhero to beat this summer is going to be Hancock (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZQQgvhn4jg)! I know a lot of comic book fans are going to be pissed if this knocks off all the 'real' superheroes, but let's face it... this movie looks like gold.

[Russkafin]

http://www.empireonline.com/features/hulk/1.asp has comments from director Louis Leterrier on some specific moments from the trailer, and what else we can look for. Very cool stuff!


on the website I notice they are using the opening chords of "lonely man").

According to an interview with Leterrier in Wizard magazine, the "lonely man" theme will be in the movie as well - they purchased the rights to it so they could use it.

[EinBebop]

btw... i really would love to have that very last image from the trailer as my wallpaper... plz link if anyone finds a quality pic of that.

[EinBebop]

double post sorry

[Young Justice]

The trailer looks nice. This movie is very promising. I just thought that visually this Hulk is too similar to the one from Ang Lee's. Maybe it's because I've watched the trailer on You Tube. Let's see when it was released in a bigger version with more resolution.

[Spider-Man]

Spike.com has the trailer in HD:

http://www.spike.com/presents/hulk

I can't say I'm blown away by the trailer but I like that they used a scene, inspired by one of my favorite moments from The Ultimate series, in here.

[Cortez2301]

Looks pretty good.I think it will be better than Iron man.

[The Clown Prince]

26 minute fight? Good God that is awesome! Sounds like Marvel and Universal really want to make up for the short comings from the first film.

Plus it looks like those shots from the trailer weren't completed FX. But boy, 3 months to go and a 26 minute fight? They better hurry.

[Jacob T. Paschal]

Well, let's remember this film will probably only have one fight in it so it'll have to be a duesy.

[James]

According to an interview with Leterrier in Wizard magazine, the "lonely man" theme will be in the movie as well - they purchased the rights to it so they could use it.

Awesome news. Thanks for the info. This is a definite see on my list (and my list is normally short - around a movie a year, though with Indy on the scene that might rank for double in 2008!)

[Hanshotfirst113]

Well, let's remember this film will probably only have one fight in it so it'll have to be a doosey.


That's surprising; I wonder if it's a budgetary thing and we won't see much of the Hulk then?



26 minute fight? Good God that is awesome! Sounds like Marvel and Universal really want to make up for the short comings from the first film.

Plus it looks like those shots from the trailer weren't completed FX. But boy, 3 months to go and a 26 minute fight? They better hurry.

Where'd you hear about that?


Awesome news. Thanks for the info. This is a definite see on my list (and my list is normally short - around a movie a year, though with Indy on the scene that might rank for double in 2008!)

Really? You've never struck me as a Hulk fan ;).

[Jacob T. Paschal]

That's surprising; I wonder if it's a budgetary thing and we won't see much of the Hulk then?




Where'd you hear about that?



Really? You've never struck me as a Hulk fan ;).

What, a you've an avatar???

By the way, Clown Prince where didja here that 26 minute thing?

[ShadowGUN]

For those wondering about the CG Hulk appearance the director mention that the CG isn't finish yet


We released the trailer quite late because no shots are finished yet. That’s why we took so long to release the teaser, because unlike the other movies coming out this summer, our main character relies on so much calculation and technique. None of the shots in this trailer are finished shots, but I think it’s decent enough and it shows the audience what we’re going for. There’s a different version of the teaser that will only be shown in movie theatres where you see a close-up of the Hulk’s face as he comes out of the darkness and cries to [Betty]. A full close-up, like full-screen. And until we had that shot right I didn’t want to release it. That’s why it took so long for us…I never saw that Superbowl spot [that drew criticism of Ang Lee’s film for showing Hulk unfinished]. I’ve asked for it and they’ve said, “No, no, you don’t want to see that.” (Laughs) Anyway, I would have never allowed anything to come out that I wasn’t happy with."

You can read more here (http://www.empireonline.com/features/hulk/1.asp).

[Jacob T. Paschal]

Was the Super Bowl shot that bad?

[ShadowGUN]

btw... i really would love to have that very last image from the trailer as my wallpaper... plz link if anyone finds a quality pic of that.
Is this the one?
http://www.empireonline.com/images/features/hulk/11.jpg

:D EPIC :D .

Newsarama (http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=149904)has some more of them with better quality.

Somewhat movie related but apparently the tie-in video game (http://kotaku.com/367496/segas-incredible-hulk-doesnt-mess-with-a-good-thing)will be similar to Ultimate Destruction.

[FightingDreamer]

I really liked Ang Lee's Hulk, but this certainly looks like an (ahem) smashing good time (I'm sorry, I'm sorry! I had to use that pun:D). I dig the Green Giant's leaner look, and the promise of a 26-minute climactic battle between the Hulk and Abomination is awesome. The trailer wasn't as mind-blowing or superhuman-grin-inducing as, say, the second Iron Man trailer, the Hellboy II trailer, or the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull teaser, but the movie looks pretty good.

[mr.happy]

This trailer was pretty awful, and it's going to be tricky to sell The Abomination as a villain. The Hulk himself doesn't look particularly endearing either, so the action could easily turn into just another boring Beowulf-ish CGI blah-fest. The human cast looks about as dull as the one from the first movie, if not more so.

Not impressed.

[Hanshotfirst113]

This trailer was pretty awful, and it's going to be tricky to sell The Abomination as a villain.

Why? At least now the Hulk actually has something to fight with.


The Hulk himself doesn't look particularly endearing either, so the action could easily turn into just another boring Beowulf-ish CGI blah-fest.If nothing else could be said for Lee's film, the CGI was good. I'm wondering if Louis has the experience to carry such a big budgeted film, but part of the problem with the trailer was that it didn't show much the action that's used to sell so many pictures these days. Of course, ILM probably haven't finished with much of that yet...


The human cast looks about as dull as the one from the first movie, if not more so.Yeah, that's a problem, but there's no Nick Nolte around this time at least :D! Still, without Sam Elliot's scenery-chewing, no one looks that interesting this time out.


Not impressed.Not surprised :p.


The trailer wasn't as mind-blowing or superhuman-grin-inducing as, say, the second Iron Man trailer, the Hellboy II trailer, or the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull teaser, but the movie looks pretty good.I was thinking the same. Indy 4 holds the record for trailer so far this year, just for the sheer thrill of seeing Ford in the duds again, and Iron Man's willingness to show off it's protagonist in loving detail makes me much more anticipatory than my initial cynical assessment :p. Still, fanboy that I am, Hellboy II is what I'm really revved up for this summer, and it's great montage of Harryhausen pastiche was delight. Hulk's trailer was bit dry in comparison, but as I've said, ILM are probably still working on most of it. This summer looks like a good crop overall though, and who knows? Maybe Hulk will turn out well.

[mr.happy]

Why? At least now the Hulk actually has something to fight with.Many a crappy monster movie has shown us that simply having someone to fight with isn't enough in itself. You need characters you love or hate, to root for and against, or the battle won't matter. These two CGI zombies don't do anything for me.


If nothing else could be said for Lee's film, the CGI was good. I'm wondering if Louis has the experience to carry such a big budgeted filmI remember reading an interview with him, when he had just signed to direct the movie, and he seemed to dislike CGI, and even suggested he might go with a live-action Hulk.


but part of the problem with the trailer was that it didn't show much the action that's used to sell so many pictures these days. Of course, ILM probably haven't finished with much of that yet...The movie is out in a few months, so they should have a lot more than what we saw here.


Yeah, that's a problem, but there's no Nick Nolte around this time at least :D! True.


Still, without Sam Elliot's scenery-chewing, no one looks that interesting this time out.Edward Norton usually has real presence, but it just didn't come across here.

I think the problem with a movie like this is that it has to appeal to your inner child, and it just looks too dark and dull so far, with not a single likable character in sight.


Not surprised :p.And the dance continues. ;)

[FightingDreamer]

Yeah, that's a problem, but there's no Nick Nolte around this time at least :D! Still, without Sam Elliot's scenery-chewing, no one looks that interesting this time out.

Bah, you're crazy. Nolte was one of the best parts of that movie; how can you not love the moment where he goes from metaphorically chewing the scenery to literally chewing a freaking electric wire? And I liked Eric Bana and Jennifer Connelly's low-key, quiet performances; they served as an interesting contrast to the scenery-obscuring of Nolte and Elliot.

And how can a film geek such as yourself resist the double threat of William Hurt (as Ross) and TIM ROTH as Emil Blonsky, who becomes the Abomination? Roth needs to do more movies, I tell ya (he's also in the upcoming FUNNY GAMES, which is apparently a remake from the director of the original French film).

[Hanshotfirst113]

(he's also in the upcoming FUNNY GAMES, which is apparently a remake from the director of the original French film).

Austrian, actually ;). Still can't get Reservoir Dogs out of my head though :p.

[Young Justice]

Many a crappy monster movie has shown us that simply having someone to fight with isn't enough in itself. You need characters you love or hate, to root for and against, or the battle won't matter. These two CGI zombies don't do anything for me.

I think the Abomination plot would reach its climax just before Tim Roth gets to be transformed. I think we will delve into Emil personality before he gets the gamma ray treatment.

And there's also a rumor that we will have The Leader orchestrating things from the shadows. Anyone to confirm that?

About the CGI I was really not impressed. But let's wait and see it in the context of the actual movie. And of course the scenes are not yet finished.

[Silly McGooses]

There's going to be a 26-minute fight in this film? Ugggh, I can barely sit through five-minute ones. I hope they break up the action a lot.

[The Clown Prince]

By the way, Clown Prince where didja here that 26 minute thing?

It's at the Empire link that Russkafin posted a page back, but here is the section of the story that talks about it...



" This sequence (the one where the Hulk and Abomination go at it) is toward the end of the movie. But our final scene, our final battle – unlike a normal movie where the final fight scene is six minutes long, ours is 26 minutes long! So you get 26 minutes of two monsters pummelling each other through New York City, jumping up and down, ripping helicopters from the sky and stuff. You know, lots of green blood on the street, splashed all around. So it’s pretty cool. For me it was one of the most exciting elements of making the movie: ‘I have two monsters fighting in New York City, that’s going to be fun.’ You know, how do you come up with fun, original stuff? And you’ve seen just the beginning of the face-off, with the monsters running towards each other — BOOM! — they smash into each other, and then craziness ensues. Some humans try to get out of the way but no, they can’t… there’s a little bit of collateral damage! (Laughs) There’s a bit of a bodycount. Not on account of the Hulk — the Hulk’s a saviour — but Blomsky is ruthless."

[Knight]

The trailer looks alright to me. Hopefully this movie is better than HULK.

[Hanshotfirst113]

Many a crappy monster movie has shown us that simply having someone to fight with isn't enough in itself. You need characters you love or hate, to root for and against, or the battle won't matter. These two CGI zombies don't do anything for me.

I think a lot of that has to do with the way CGI is used. Look at Ray Harryhausen. His creatures have more life than many of the living actors in the films! It comes down the amount of life that you give the monsters. Look at Guillermo del Toro, Peter Jackson, and James Cameron vs. the rather static robots in Transformers. Look at Robocop or a Japanese kaiju eiga films (guys in suits) or The Host vs. Tomb Raider or Resident Evil or End of Days. CG isn't the intrinsic problem. It's when it's used in ways like the Star Wars prequels that it becomes gratuitous and unnecessary, when it becomes a substitute for any actual narrative or moreover soul. The Alien Queen from Cameron's Aliens is one of the most fascinating creature creations ever. Its almost believable as a living, breathing creature. The thing with CGI is that it has become wait and hour and 20 minutes for the monster to show up, oh, it looks cool. Even the worst 50s monster cheese at least had an interesting looking creature. The best monster movies love their creatures (one the reasons that I love Guillermo del Toro) instead of just using them as plot MacGuffins. Spider-Man 1&2, X-Men 1&2, Hellboy, Blade I and II (to a much lesser extent), Superman Returns, Batman Begins, The Lord of the Rings all managed this. The spectacle should be set dressing, not the main event. Whatever I though of Lee's film, its angle was interesting: a character study of the Hulk. It's problem was its execution, but the concept was interesting. With this new film, I'm hoping for just such a monster mash (Really, it's based on a comic-book, I want a damned widescreen slugfest), but whether it will deliver is something else. We'll see.


I remember reading an interview with him, when he had just signed to direct the movie, and he seemed to dislike CGI, and even suggested he might go with a live-action Hulk.

Look at his background. He's worked with choreographers from Hong Kong, a classic example of the above: imagination over budget. The idea of infusing someone with French and Hong Kong training into a Hollywood setting will require a little alchemy. He's bound to be shaky, and I can hardly blame him.


The movie is out in a few months, so they should have a lot more than what we saw here.

Damn straight. But as usual, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. I'm naive that way.


True.

Perhaps that goes without saying ;).


Edward Norton usually has real presence, but it just didn't come across here.

It's a two-minute trailer. We won't know until we see the movie.


I think the problem with a movie like this is that it has to appeal to your inner child, and it just looks too dark and dull so far, with not a single likable character in sight.

This depends on a lot of things. Comic-book movies generally work one of two ways: the revel in their pulpy, zesty origins (Blade, Blade II, Dick Tracy, Batman, Batman Returns, Superman, Superman II, Hellboy, Fantastic Four, The Shadow) or they go the opposite route and actually aim to take things seriously (Batman Begins, Hulk, Superman Returns, the criminally underrated The Crow, X-Men, X2). The first two Spider-Man installments actually fall somewhere in between, which is why I think that they work so well. Lots of people argue that Batman Begins and Superman Returns are just no damn fun, which I understand, though I in my turn really appreciate their ambition and psychological complexity. Personally, I think that both approaches have their merits, but the Hulk tried the latter the last time out and it didn't work. Unless they want to delve into the Peter David-style psychodrama underpinnings, they'd be wise to just smash stuff this time out (especially given Louis' resume), but we'll see.


And the dance continues. ;)

And I have two left feet :p.

[mr.happy]

I think a lot of that has to do with the way CGI is used. Look at Ray Harryhausen. His creatures have more life than many of the living actors in the films! It comes down the amount of life that you give the monsters. Look at Guillermo del Toro, Peter Jackson, and James Cameron vs. the rather static robots in Transformers.Transformers was pretty smart in its execution, though. Hardcore fans will claim the humans took too much focus away from the robots, but the movie would never have made 900 Trillion had it just been about giant robots slugging it out with each other for 2 hours.


CG isn't the intrinsic problem. It's when it's used in ways like the Star Wars prequels that it becomes gratuitous and unnecessary, when it becomes a substitute for any actual narrative or moreover soul.I have no problem with CGI at all, just bad CGI, but I wouldn't even necessarily say what we saw in the trailer was bad CGI, it's just that the characters, Hulk and Abomination, weren't really the sort of designs that spark my imagination or capture my interest.

Whatever I though of Lee's film, its angle was interesting: a character study of the Hulk. It's problem was its execution, but the concept was interesting. With this new film, I'm hoping for just such a monster mash (Really, it's based on a comic-book, I want a damned widescreen slugfest), but whether it will deliver is something else. We'll see.I'm just so bored with these dark, edgy, ponderous superhero movies. I want some real superhero fun. Not comedy, but just something that's enjoyable and brings a smile to my face. The first two Spider-Man movies had elements of that, Transformers did too.


Damn straight. But as usual, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. I'm naive that way.Sure, I'm just commenting on my impression from this particular trailer. I'm still hoping there turns out to be more to this movie than we've seen so far, I'm just not very optimistic about it.


Personally, I think that both approaches have their merits, but the Hulk tried the latter the last time out and it didn't work. Unless they want to delve into the Peter David-style psychodrama underpinnings, they'd be wise to just smash stuff this time out (especially given Louis' resume), but we'll see.Hulk has always been at his best with likable human sidekicks. This is true both for the comic and the TV show. Bruce Banner himself isn't all that interesting, and I'm not all that excited about exploring his psychological issues. Maybe, for the sake of mainstream success, it would have been more sensible for this incarnation of Banner to have embraced Hulk and enjoy being a superhero. I don't mean the intelligent Hulk, but rather that Banner wouldn't mind letting the jolly green giant out once in a while, and that the creature would be less of an uncontrollable monster, and more of a simple-minded, likable fellow with anger management issues. :)


And I have two left feet :p.I'll lead.

[DarkAngel]

Hardcore fans will claim the humans took too much focus away from the robots, but the movie would never have made 900 Trillion had it just been about giant robots slugging it out with each other for 2 hours.
Not a hardcore fan, but the humans did take the focus away from the robots. That's not to say I wanted them "slugging it out with each other for 2 hours" either. Given the way Bay filmed the action, I certainly wouldn't have appreciated 2 hours of action. ;)

I hate Hulk, almost in its entirety, so even if this trailer wasn't amazing, for me it showed more promise. You're right that two CGI monsters battling isn't enough in itself, but since we can't possibly tell now if the movie will make us care, its hard to judge that aspect yet. I'm just glad we have a (potentially) more interesting villain. Has to be better than that Nolte-lightening creature crap from the previous movie. I'm not a Hulk fan, so if that was some significant/loved character from the comics, I apologize. But I thought that whole element was unnecessary and seriously craptacular.


I'm just so bored with these dark, edgy, ponderous superhero movies. I want some real superhero fun. Not comedy, but just something that's enjoyable and brings a smile to my face. The first two Spider-Man movies had elements of that, Transformers did too.
If its dark/edge with the quality of BB, I'll be happy. If its more Spidey-like, I'll be willing to give it a chance. If its comparable to Transformers, I'll pass.

[Hanshotfirst113]

Transformers was pretty smart in its execution, though. Hardcore fans will claim the humans took too much focus away from the robots, but the movie would never have made 900 Trillion had it just been about giant robots slugging it out with each other for 2 hours.

I thought that the humans were mind-bogglingly stupid and boring, but as my opinion on Transformers are well-known, we'll move on :p. Bay did seem to be enjoying himself, however. It least the film never pretended to be the bloody quest for the Holy Grail. Look at The Transporter movies. They redefine idiotic and stupid, but at least they don't overstay their welcome. At under 90 minutes, they're ideal beer-and-pizza, late-night-cable fare.


I have no problem with CGI at all, just bad CGI, but I wouldn't even necessarily say what we saw in the trailer was bad CGI, it's just that the characters, Hulk and Abomination, weren't really the sort of designs that spark my imagination or capture my interest.

Also true. I think that a great example would be Jurassic Park. Why did most people go to that movie? To see how real the dinosaurs looked. Look, in comparison, at a 60s Japanese rubber-suit mash. Not that I have anything against Spielberg's film per se, but compared to, say, Ishiro Honda, there's none of the wild imagination. All of the monsters in kaiju eiga films look like something that I've never seen before. Again, to come back to del Toro (yeah, I'm a huge fanboy, sue me), his creatures are grotesque, yet poetic. I've never seen things that look quite like them.


I'm just so bored with these dark, edgy, ponderous superhero movies.

I think that that depends on a lot of things. Batman, for example, is a character that lends himself to dark psychological complexities and noir-esque worlds. Superman is true blue. Different approaches. Personally, I loved how Bryan Singer's X-Men films turned out because he was willing to take things seriously as opposed to Ratner's film. There's some stunning work on display in his film with all kinds of interesting (albeit subtle as a sledgehammer) allegorical implications. By contrast, Ang Lee's original Hulk seemed to focus so much on these elements, I found myself bored ("a comic-book movie for people who don't normally go to comic-book movies," as Roger Ebert put it). I found it just endlessly ponderous (though I think that I need to rewatch the film). Same with Mark-Steven Johnson's Daredevil and Ghost Rider. It's like Chris Columbus' Harry Potter films. There's craft, but not passion. He's more concerned with the letter than the spirit. Cuaron may have veered from the book, but his enthusiasm is evident in every frame, and it enlivens things to the nth degree.


I want some real superhero fun. Not comedy, but just something that's enjoyable and brings a smile to my face. The first two Spider-Man movies had elements of that, Transformers did too.

The first two Spider-Man films struck a great balance between both style, which is why I think that that worked so well.

Sure, I'm just commenting on my impression from this particular trailer. I'm still hoping there turns out to be more to this movie than we've seen so far, I'm just not very optimistic about it.


Hulk has always been at his best with likable human sidekicks. This is true both for the comic and the TV show. Bruce Banner himself isn't all that interesting, and I'm not all that excited about exploring his psychological issues.

Yeah, he's kind of a drag. Introduce Rick Jones to give things some kick.


Maybe, for the sake of mainstream success, it would have been more sensible for this incarnation of Banner to have embraced Hulk and enjoy being a superhero.

Interesting idea. Revel in things, man!


I don't mean the intelligent Hulk, but rather that Banner wouldn't mind letting the jolly green giant out once in a while, and that the creature would be less of an uncontrollable monster, and more of a simple-minded, likable fellow with anger management issues. :)


You mean...a superhero ;)?


I'll lead.

*very bad images of high school appear in my head :D*

[mr.happy]

Not a hardcore fan, but the humans did take the focus away from the robots.And that's what made it such a great movie. Bay understood that you don't have to pander to the fans to make a hugely successful movie.


I hate Hulk, almost in its entirety, so even if this trailer wasn't amazing, for me it showed more promise. You're right that two CGI monsters battling isn't enough in itself, but since we can't possibly tell now if the movie will make us care, its hard to judge that aspect yet.A good trailer can make you care about the characters, but in this one, the rest of the cast might as well have been CGI too.


If its dark/edge with the quality of BB, I'll be happy. If its more Spidey-like, I'll be willing to give it a chance. If its comparable to Transformers, I'll pass.Batman Begins bored me to tears. I thought the X-Men movies had a better balance between fun and drama, but I would much rather see a Hulk movie that's closer to Transformers or the first two Spider-Man movies in tone.

[mr.happy]

I thought that the humans were mind-bogglingly stupid and boring, but as my opinion on Transformers are well-known, we'll move on :p.Don't move on. You should explore your confused feelings on Transformers. Maybe some traumatic childhood experience is at the root of your problem? Like an awkward prom night slow-dance with a guy who looked a lot like Shia Lebeuff? :)


Bay did seem to be enjoying himself, however. It least the film never pretended to be the bloody quest for the Holy Grail. Look at The Transporter movies. They redefine idiotic and stupid, but at least they don't overstay their welcome. At under 90 minutes, they're ideal beer-and-pizza, late-night-cable fare.Haven't seen the 2nd one, but the first was good fun.


Also true. I think that a great example would be Jurassic Park. Why did most people go to that movie? To see how real the dinosaurs looked. Look, in comparison, at a 60s Japanese rubber-suit mash. Not that I have anything against Spielberg's film per se, but compared to, say, Ishiro Honda, there's none of the wild imagination. All of the monsters in kaiju eiga films look like something that I've never seen before. Again, to come back to del Toro (yeah, I'm a huge fanboy, sue me), his creatures are grotesque, yet poetic. I've never seen things that look quite like them.Can't say I've seen much of Del Toro's work.


I think that that depends on a lot of things. Batman, for example, is a character that lends himself to dark psychological complexities and noir-esque worlds. Superman is true blue. Different approaches.Someone should have told Singer.


Yeah, he's kind of a drag. Introduce Rick Jones to give things some kick.And maybe a likable Betty Ross.


*very bad images of high school appear in my head :D*Yes, so I've heard. Luckily my date was more Megan Fox than Shia Lebeuf. :p

[James]

This trailer was pretty awful, and it's going to be tricky to sell The Abomination as a villain. The Hulk himself doesn't look particularly endearing either, so the action could easily turn into just another boring Beowulf-ish CGI blah-fest. The human cast looks about as dull as the one from the first movie, if not more so.

Not impressed.

I don't know how much of the Hulk you've read/seen, but I think the trailer pretty much nailed the key attributes. There was a decent split between platforming Banner's motivations and the lead of the title, the green beast himself. The trailer wasn't a "CGI blah fest", the majority of it was human based, focusing on the journey of Banner looking for a cure not a mode to control the beast; giving Norton good time to key into the main factors of what - to me - makes the Hulk fascinating.

I agree though about the CGI - I have no interest in CGI monsters, in fact the mooted notion of a 26 minute fight isn't enthralling, though given the nature of the Hollywood Blockbuster, hardly surprising.

I have high hopes. If you have no interest in Jekyll/Hyde issues and big beasts bashing things, then I agree, there is little in this trailer that would tickle. But for a 1 minute 30 seconds teaser, I think it carried the correct balance, and by the looks of things has found a FAR more logical and focused storyline that meshes the conflict Banner has between curse/benefits of the Hulk with a plot that can carry a larger arc dealing with a big nasty antagonist for the Hulk to match - a mistake the first film paid for. Floating absorbing man and some steroid poodles weren't really Hulk Smash material.

As long as they make sure the Abomination arc and the Banner arc don't convolute, I think this affair should be far closer to capturing the appropriate elements of the comic.

So far as the trailer went, it caught the essence of what the Hulk is about. Whether or not that is your cup of tea (and given how I myself am bored with the superhero film genre as a whole, I can empathise), is another matter IMO.

[FightingDreamer]

[quote=Hanshotfirst113;2806908] By contrast, Ang Lee's original Hulk seemed to focus so much on these elements, I found myself bored ("a comic-book movie for people who don't normally go to comic-book movies," as Roger Ebert put it). I found it just endlessly ponderous (though I think that I need to rewatch the film)[quote]

I would definitely suggest that, Mike. I only saw the movie myself fairly recently, and I thought it was a fascinating trip. Sure, it's not what anyone was expecting, but I admire Ang Lee's ambition, and it's one of the only times save for Creepshow that using onscreen comic book "panels" has actually worked.

[James]

I would definitely suggest that, Mike. I only saw the movie myself fairly recently, and I thought it was a fascinating trip. Sure, it's not what anyone was expecting, but I admire Ang Lee's ambition, and it's one of the only times save for Creepshow that using onscreen comic book "panels" has actually worked.

I find Hulk a hard movie to watch because you can see the potential, wrapped in a mess that you'd expect from an amateur, not a professional movie studio.

Hulk is a simple story which doesn't require overt complexities as the main character carries the complexity himself. The whole father storyline was messy and redundant, creating the more sluggish, silly moments in the film (absorbing man, the absorbing man V hulk battle, the aforementioned poodles etc).

If they'd kept the father influence relegated to the flashbacks, kept the army at the forefront and focused heavily on Bruce's need for a cure, you had the makings of a good movie - Bana was very good, he had chemistry with Connelly, the music, action were all solid. I personally liked the paneling, but
I can see how that frustrated some. I even liked a lot of the more darker elements to Banner they introduced.

It was just a film which instead of strengthening the more straight forward elements, fought to add stuff which just weakened the whole trip into a boring convulted mess of silliness and poor realised scenes.

Whenever I watch it, I see such potential, and then I see such awkwardness. A real mucky experience which I think IHulk is looking at trying to avoid.

[Beat]

I think the Abomination plot would reach its climax just before Tim Roth gets to be transformed. I think we will delve into Emil personality before he gets the gamma ray treatment.

And there's also a rumor that we will have The Leader orchestrating things from the shadows. Anyone to confirm that?

About the CGI I was really not impressed. But let's wait and see it in the context of the actual movie. And of course the scenes are not yet finished.

That's the first I've heard of The Leader being in the movie in any way, but I'm actually kinda glad. The problem with Hulk is that they got the guy from Sense and Sensibility, Eat Drink Man Woman, and Brokeback Mountain to make an action film. Wrong approach. It was about a CGI collossus and his daddy issues, which isn't a really good approach for a monster movie. Now we have Norton actually fighting supervillians and the military.

[Hanshotfirst113]

Don't move on. You should explore your confused feelings on Transformers. Maybe some traumatic childhood experience is at the root of your problem? Like an awkward prom night slow-dance with a guy who looked a lot like Shia Lebeuff? :)

Oh, please, there was no in my class who looked like....Oh, crap. Excuse me. (Interestingly, both of the girls which I took my prom are now good friends of mine.)


Haven't seen the 2nd one, but the first was good fun.The key for me was that it didn't overstay its welcome.


Can't say I've seen much of Del Toro's work.As I say, I'm a huge fan, so...


Yes, so I've heard. Luckily my date was more Megan Fox than Shia Lebeuf. :p

You are evil and malicious you do know this right :p;)?


I don't know how much of the Hulk you've read/seen, but I think the trailer pretty much nailed the key attributes. There was a decent split between platforming Banner's motivations and the lead of the title, the green beast himself. The trailer wasn't a "CGI blah fest", the majority of it was human based, focusing on the journey of Banner looking for a cure not a mode to control the beast; giving Norton good time to key into the main factors of what - to me - makes the Hulk fascinating.

I agree though about the CGI - I have no interest in CGI monsters, in fact the mooted notion of a 26 minute fight isn't enthralling, though given the nature of the Hollywood Blockbuster, hardly surprising.

I have high hopes. If you have no interest in Jekyll/Hyde issues and big beasts bashing things, then I agree, there is little in this trailer that would tickle. But for a 1 minute 30 seconds teaser, I think it carried the correct balance, and by the looks of things has found a FAR more logical and focused storyline that meshes the conflict Banner has between curse/benefits of the Hulk with a plot that can carry a larger arc dealing with a big nasty antagonist for the Hulk to match - a mistake the first film paid for. Floating absorbing man and some steroid poodles weren't really Hulk Smash material.

As long as they make sure the Abomination arc and the Banner arc don't convolute, I think this affair should be far closer to capturing the appropriate elements of the comic.

So far as the trailer went, it caught the essence of what the Hulk is about. Whether or not that is your cup of tea (and given how I myself am bored with the superhero film genre as a whole, I can empathise), is another matter IMO.

Eloquent as always James.


I would definitely suggest that, Mike. I only saw the movie myself fairly recently, and I thought it was a fascinating trip. Sure, it's not what anyone was expecting, but I admire Ang Lee's ambition, and it's one of the only times save for Creepshow that using onscreen comic book "panels" has actually worked.

Yeah, I'll have to do that. The film really threw me for a loop, and I think that I should reevaluate it.

[mr.happy]

I don't know how much of the Hulk you've read/seen, but I think the trailer pretty much nailed the key attributes. There was a decent split between platforming Banner's motivations and the lead of the title, the green beast himself. The trailer wasn't a "CGI blah fest",I meant what little action we saw. If the movie's main set piece is going to be a 26 minute battle, that's asking a lot of the CGI.


the majority of it was human based, focusing on the journey of Banner looking for a cure not a mode to control the beast; giving Norton good time to key into the main factors of what - to me - makes the Hulk fascinating.Only when you care about the characters, and specifically the portrayal of Hulk/Banner. We've already covered how crappy CGI Hulk looks, and Norton's Banner almost seems a little bit smug and over-acted. Don't even get me started on Liv Taylor and the rest of the cast.


I have high hopes. If you have no interest in Jekyll/Hyde issues and big beasts bashing things, then I agree, there is little in this trailer that would tickle. But for a 1 minute 30 seconds teaser, I think it carried the correct balance, and by the looks of things has found a FAR more logical and focused storyline that meshes the conflict Banner has between curse/benefits of the Hulk with a plot that can carry a larger arc dealing with a big nasty antagonist for the Hulk to match - a mistake the first film paid for.I just think that considering how badly the first movie missed with audiences, to have the trailer for the reboot seemingly be about personal issues again is going to turn a lot of people off. Seriously, look at it. There's really nothing here we haven't seen in other monster/sci-fi movies 5 or 10 years ago, or indeed in the first Hulk movie, which at least had some magnificent jumping. Sounds like an odd point, I know, but for some reason, it's what most people seem to remember about it. You know, fun. Bottom line: They need a much better second trailer, or this could be a bigger flop than the first movie.


As long as they make sure the Abomination arc and the Banner arc don't convolute, I think this affair should be far closer to capturing the appropriate elements of the comic.This doesn't seem like a desirable objective to me. The Hulk comics haven't been fun or enjoyable for many years. The trend I currently see in superhero movies is similar to what happened in comic books in the late 80s, after Miller and Moore inadvertently sparked one of the dullest, darkest, and most embarrassing periods in comics ever. Too many hack writers suddenly wanted to delve into the dark depths and emotional complexities of the characters, because their own pretentious nature made them intrigued by issues their readership had no interest in, but which most of the ultimately lacked the talent to explore properly anyway. They sucked the life out of many a popular and fun character, which is something only a few ever managed to recover from. Hulk may have been one of those casualties.


You are evil and malicious you do know this right :p;)?You sound just like my therapist.

[DarkAngel]

And that's what made it such a great movie. Bay understood that you don't have to pander to the fans to make a hugely successful movie.
Absolutely no doubt about its success. In fact achieving success, assuming we're equating that with BO return, isn't that difficult and is often accomplished without much achievement in quality.

I saw Transformers as successful financially, but as a failure in terms of being "a great movie" or even an adequate movie.

With the new Hulk, I'd certainly hope for profits for them, as that'll mean more movies which would be great for fans. But it'd be awesome if it was fun and "great" as well.


A good trailer can make you care about the characters, but in this one, the rest of the cast might as well have been CGI too.
Hmm. Perhaps. I enjoy trailers and they've certainly been able at times to catch my interest with the characters. But I'm not sure my interest has been caught to the point of caring, at least not as I think of caring when watching the movie itself and appreciating the development.

You're probably right. But again, my view is colored by my dislike of the previous installment, and so simply from the perspective it seemed from the trailer like they're moving in a direction that'll be more to my liking. But I could certainly (and probably) be projecting my own hope onto the trailer. :)


Batman Begins bored me to tears. I thought the X-Men movies had a better balance between fun and drama, but I would much rather see a Hulk movie that's closer to Transformers or the first two Spider-Man movies in tone.
Greatly enjoyed the first two X-men, so if we can get something along those lines, it'd be good. Spider-man 3 was a mess, not as a good a movie as the previous two, but I enjoyed it more. So even if we can get something entertaining like that, I'd probably have fun. Again, though, and I guess this is obvious, I'd hope for a movie that's not only entertaining/fun, but well-made as well. You know, having the whole "greatness" aspect. ;)

DA

[James]

I meant what little action we saw. If the movie's main set piece is going to be a 26 minute battle, that's asking a lot of the CGI.

Yes, that's a concern for me too - but I think if you are to do the Hulk properly, then I think that's probably more important than I'd personally prefer. Most Superhero films have pretty long final battles these days, in comparison 26 minutes isn't that crazy, I just hope they keep it innovative.


Only when you care about the characters, and specifically the portrayal of Hulk/Banner. We've already covered how crappy CGI Hulk looks, and Norton's Banner almost seems a little bit smug and over-acted. Don't even get me started on Liv Taylor and the rest of the cast.

Again, if you don't find the characters interesting from the offset, then you aren't going to like the movie - regardless of how good. I fail to see how you can assess Norton, Tyler or the rest of the cast from a one minute thirty trailer. I'm not Liv's biggest fan, but I'm happy to give her the benefit of the doubt until we see more.


I just think that considering how badly the first movie missed with audiences, to have the trailer for the reboot seemingly be about personal issues again is going to turn a lot of people off. Seriously, look at it. There's really nothing here we haven't seen in other monster/sci-fi movies 5 or 10 years ago, or indeed in the first Hulk movie, which at least had some magnificent jumping. Sounds like an odd point, I know, but for some reason, it's what most people seem to remember about it. You know, fun. Bottom line: They need a much better second trailer, or this could be a bigger flop than the first movie.

If that reason bares fruition - and it could a given the epic of superhero genre films has been done to death there is little more I can imagine they will find in "wow" factor (having found Hellboy, Superman Returns, Batman Begins, Fantastic Four, X3 etc etc below par - with the only real exception being the Spider-Man franchise), then I doubt there is much else that could be done.

I think this will carry the essence of what the Hulk is about in character and action - whether or not its too late thanks to a saturated genre and a below par first film will have to be seen.


This doesn't seem like a desirable objective to me. The Hulk comics haven't been fun or enjoyable for many years. The trend I currently see in superhero movies is similar to what happened in comic books in the late 80s, after Miller and Moore inadvertently sparked one of the dullest, darkest, and most embarrassing periods in comics ever. Too many hack writers suddenly wanted to delve into the dark depths and emotional complexities of the characters, because their own pretentious nature made them intrigued by issues their readership had no interest in, but which most of the ultimately lacked the talent to explore properly anyway. They sucked the life out of many a popular and fun character, which is something only a few ever managed to recover from. Hulk may have been one of those casualties.


Given this element of the Banner was explored years before Miller's change to comics occurred, I don't think it's a fair comparison. Nearly all the elements I've seen to stem from before that . Banner dealing with his dark side, his bad background and ultimately looking to rid himself of his beast (or as the TV show preferred, illness), has been a staple part of the Hulk - most of which from the beginning in a watered down way. If this film is going to take the ethos of what makes the Hulk popular it has to be a hybrid of Banner's battle and Hulk smash. That is precisely what this film intends - to what success remains to be seen.

[Hanshotfirst113]

And that's what made it such a great movie. Bay understood that you don't have to pander to the fans to make a hugely successful movie.

Bay pandered to the same audience that he always panders to: the "alpha male" types. Big explosions, manic camera moves, slow-mo and hyper speed editing, hot women, things getting smashed and blown up, etc. The Transformers were essentially the backdrop. The film could have been about just about anything. Bay is so successful because he can tap into what audiences want to see. The robots, the Transformers universe, etc. were just set dressing. He filmed it the same way that he filmed Pearl Harbor, Bad Boys II, Armageddon, and The Rock. Buddy cops, outer space adventures, historical events, Bay treats them the same way. Again, this is why his films are so successful (not trying to be bitter here).


Batman Begins bored me to tears.

You're going to have to this one alone ;). Begins was well regarded by many fans and critics, so you're entitled to your opinion (shared likewise by James), but you might want to pick another example :p.


I thought the X-Men movies had a better balance between fun and drama

Actually, the first two X-Men films took thing quite seriously and managed to hold things together well without being ponderous.


but I would much rather see a Hulk movie that's closer to Transformers or the first two Spider-Man movies in tone.

The first two Spider-Man film really weren't all fun and games. They were loaded with melodrama, but heated at the right temperature.


Absolutely no doubt about its success. In fact achieving success, assuming we're equating that with BO return, isn't that difficult and is often accomplished without much achievement in quality.

I saw Transformers as successful financially, but as a failure in terms of being "a great movie" or even an adequate movie.

Ah, the endless circle. Personally, I'm of both minds. If something is rolling in box office dollars, it means that lots of people enjoyed it...but Deep Throat wasn't the highest grossing independent film ever made at the time because it was quality piece of work now, was it :p? Putting aside my personal feelings as much as possible, Bay is successful for this reason: he can tap into what audiences want on some base level. Call it pornographic (and I mean that in the best way possible). He gives the people what they want. He's a sensational tabloid journalist. The same way that the Rambo films were successful during the Cold War. Do I sneer at Bay? Sure. But he's a doer and I'm a thinker. He's a lot richer than I'll ever be.


With the new Hulk, I'd certainly hope for profits for them, as that'll mean more movies which would be great for fans. But it'd be awesome if it was fun and "great" as well.

Indeed.


Hmm. Perhaps. I enjoy trailers and they've certainly been able at times to catch my interest with the characters. But I'm not sure my interest has been caught to the point of caring, at least not as I think of caring when watching the movie itself and appreciating the development.

What puts buttocks in seats opening week? Trailers. Trailers have to rock. They sell the movie more than reviews or quality or anything else for the launching pad (I once heard Michael Bay movies described as "two-hour trailers, which I thought was apt). They've got to be colorful and get people's attention. That's not good, bad, or indifferent. It's just what they do.


Yes, that's a concern for me too - but I think if you are to do the Hulk properly, then I think that's probably more important than I'd personally prefer. Most Superhero films have pretty long final battles these days, in comparison 26 minutes isn't that crazy, I just hope they keep it innovative.

Which is one thing that could be said for Sam Raimi. His dancing, manic camera-work gives his action set pieces so much imagination and life.


If that reason bares fruition - and it could a given the epic of superhero genre films has been done to death there is little more I can imagine they will find in "wow" factor (having found Hellboy, Superman Returns, Batman Begins, Fantastic Four, X3 etc etc below par - with the only real exception being the Spider-Man franchise), then I doubt there is much else that could be done.

I loved Hellboy and Batman Begins and liked Superman Returns. X3, Daredevil, Ghost Rider, and FF I will give you, however. While I don't think that it will be this particular film, I think that there's life to be breathed into the superhero genre, it's just that there's such a glut of them right now, that's all. Hell, Peckinpah did it for the Western. So did Clint Eastwood. The Matrix reinvigorated the action film genre, but its fallout left us with endless clones. It's the same here. You've got X-Men, Spider-Man, Batman Begins, X2, Hellboy, Spider-Man 2, and in exchange, we get lots of other character milked for all that they're worth. As Kurt Vonnegut would say, so it goes.


Given this element of the Banner was explored years before Miller's change to comics occurred, I don't think it's a fair comparison. Nearly all the elements I've seen to stem from before that . Banner dealing with his dark side, his bad background and ultimately looking to rid himself of his beast (or as the TV show preferred, illness), has been a staple part of the Hulk - most of which from the beginning in a watered down way. If this film is going to take the ethos of what makes the Hulk popular it has to be a hybrid of Banner's battle and Hulk smash. That is precisely what this film intends - to what success remains to be seen.

Miller and Moore are getting blamed for something incorrectly here, IMO. They both kicked the genre and the medium in the tail (as mentioned above), and everyone tried to imitate them, but only grasped onto the surface of what was different about them, not the deeper underpinnings. Not unlike what was mentioned above.


You sound just like my therapist.

Ah, what do they know :D?

[mr.happy]

Yes, that's a concern for me too - but I think if you are to do the Hulk properly, then I think that's probably more important than I'd personally prefer. Most Superhero films have pretty long final battles these days, in comparison 26 minutes isn't that crazy, I just hope they keep it innovative.Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't mind a great 26 minute battle, but on the strength of what I saw in this trailer, I just don't think these two CGI zombies are going to make it interesting enough.


Again, if you don't find the characters interesting from the offset, then you aren't going to like the movie - regardless of how good. I fail to see how you can assess Norton, Tyler or the rest of the cast from a one minute thirty trailer. I'm not Liv's biggest fan, but I'm happy to give her the benefit of the doubt until we see more.Liv Tyler is a lost cause, as far as I'm concerned. I don't think she's going to change my opinion with this particular performance. I certainly saw nothing in the trailer to suggest she might. Norton didn't strike me as Bruce Banner either. He just came across as a borderline smug Edward Norton.


Given this element of the Banner was explored years before Miller's change to comics occurred, I don't think it's a fair comparison.I'm not suggesting the late 80s was a turning point for the portrayal of Hulk, but it seemed like the mentality of both comic book writers and readers of that period was the apple that broke the camel's back.


Nearly all the elements I've seen to stem from before that . Banner dealing with his dark side, his bad background and ultimately looking to rid himself of his beast (or as the TV show preferred, illness), has been a staple part of the Hulk - most of which from the beginning in a watered down way. If this film is going to take the ethos of what makes the Hulk popular it has to be a hybrid of Banner's battle and Hulk smash.Sure, but it needs to be done in the context of an interesting story, some great action and likable characters. The trailer gave me none of that. Of all the upcoming superhero movies, I'm actually most looking forward to Hancock. Maybe it can be provide the Giffen/DeMatteis contrast to the Miller/Moore-like tedium of The Hulk, Batman, et al.

[mr.happy]

Bay pandered to the same audience that he always panders to: the "alpha male" types. Big explosions, manic camera moves, slow-mo and hyper speed editing, hot women, things getting smashed and blown up, etc.Aaah, sounds like prom night all over again. Good times. :)

I don't think Transformers was an alpha-male movie at all. The male lead was somewhat of a geek, and the movie was very popular with children as well.


The Transformers were essentially the backdrop. The film could have been about just about anything. Bay is so successful because he can tap into what audiences want to see. The robots, the Transformers universe, etc. were just set dressing. He filmed it the same way that he filmed Pearl Harbor, Bad Boys II, Armageddon, and The Rock. Buddy cops, outer space adventures, historical events, Bay treats them the same way. Again, this is why his films are so successful (not trying to be bitter here).It doesn't sound bitter at all. More like a celebration of his cinematic genius.


You're going to have to this one alone ;). Begins was well regarded by many fans and critics, so you're entitled to your opinion (shared likewise by James), but you might want to pick another example :p.It's an absurdly overrated movie. For some peculiar reason, its fans have been somewhat succesful in perpetuating this myth that it was a universally acclaimed masterpiece and box office smash hit. The reality is that its reviews were roughly in the same ballpark as those of Superman Returns, and it made less money.


Miller and Moore are getting blamed for something incorrectly here, IMO. They both kicked the genre and the medium in the tail (as mentioned above), and everyone tried to imitate them, but only grasped onto the surface of what was different about them, not the deeper underpinnings. Not unlike what was mentioned above.They were certainly part of the evolution of the medium, but that doesn't mean it didn't come at a price.

[DarkAngel]

It's an absurdly overrated movie.
Ah, you must be talking about Transformers, right? ;)


For some peculiar reason, its fans have been somewhat succesful in perpetuating this myth that it was a universally acclaimed masterpiece and box office smash hit.
Now here's some melodrama. :D What I've most noted is people saying its a really good movie or great. I don't recall ever hearing the word masterpiece attached to BB or even smash hit.

Making around $205 million domestically seems appropriate (compared to say ~$400 mil) given the darker tone and I think that's a pretty good performance. Not huge, given the budget, but seems solid. SR's BO was understandably more worrisome for WB.

Both movies were well-reviewed.

Both movies, IMO, were excellent.

[James]

OT: DA, did you think SR was excellent?

And to be fair, I'm not saying that I believe - so far as its mandate went - Batman Begins was below par, just simply it didn't tickle the tackle for me, so to speak. Same with the X-Men movies.

Certainly felt Superman Returns failed to do what it should in terms or representing and perpetuating the Superman mythos, likewise with Hellboy.

Just generally, I see a superhero movie is on the cinema and I generally think, "oh, who cares?". I mean, I'm sure Iron Man would be a great superhero to watch if it was the only one, but in the end, there is only so close you can get to a comic AND balance out the summer blockbuster formula before it all becomes "seen-this-before" syndrome.

I don't blame Moore or Miller for this, in fact, both inspired some fields of creativity which were rapidly showing wear. But as is the way in any industry, with genuine novel approaches the clones doth meander, and the bad taste of poor copy spreads through the valley of allegories. I agree that where I think Batman (1989) set a new benchmark for Superhero movies, the formula has been repeated ad infinitum. Just like after Whedon played a novel approach with Buffy, the barrage of Buffyesque humour set in Highschools did ensue.

I think there is too much of a good thing and while most of this movies - ones I found dull and predictable (Hellboy, Fantastic Four, Superman Returns et al) would probably seemed fresh and exciting if just one had popped up.

Superhero movies are such a cashcow and the formulas keep the films predictable to finance the high costs of copyrights and money so I can see where the apathy comes from. I'd have loved Batman Begins to have suprrised me with a more down to earth detective finale rather than the "Save Gotham City At The Last Minute" Hollywood requirement which really isn't part of Batman's legacy. Its that sort of required insert of crass summer blockbuster magic that really dulls the shine on some otherwise potentially slick and well casted films (minus the annoying romantic roles in both SR and BB).

I'm just hoping my fanatical interest with The Incredible Hulk, plus some good casting and characterisation will get me through the bone crushing predictability which comes with the whole genre. The Hulk trailer interests me, but already I can see where it's going. I'm just praying the drama will make the plot-by-numbers prerequisite of cinema superhero films a negligible aspect.

Soapbox Out.

[FightingDreamer]

James: I think I may have enjoyed the story of Ang Lee's Hulk more than you did because I was never really familiar with the Hulk mythos, unlike yourself. For me, all the aspects of the story (father-son tragedy, essentially corporate military, doomed romance, Bruce's inner torment) were fascinating, so I guess it just depends on your familiarity with the character.

Oh, and we're still arguing over whether Transformers is good or not? I had a grand old time with it myself, but I'd hardly call it great.

[Stu]

I thought the trailer was OK, nothing remarkable but it looks to be a much better film that the original. The CG looked a little spotty but that will inevitably improve before it reaches the threaters.

It doesn't sound like they intend to have much more than Hulk smash at this point - I hope the story's there this time. The dynamic between Hulk and Banner was sorely missed in the previous movie.

[Moto Pete]

The Trailer has me wanting to see it

[Hanshotfirst113]

Certainly felt Superman Returns failed to do what it should in terms or representing and perpetuating the Superman mythos, likewise with Hellboy.

As usual, James, eloquent and well spoken, but I'm not 100% sure what you mean. Both representations were far from the usual, but that's why I found them appealing; they extrapolated ideas from the comics into different contexts. I definately think that del Toro had a strong obsession with the mythology of the comics in his Hellboy film, he simple chose to shift the focus in a peculiar direction, and his attempts to blend his idiosyncratic aesthetics with the requirements of a studio film were ultimately clashing ideologies. The central Hollywood archetypes of cocky hero and sidekick, overbearing boss, new kid, father figure, girlfriend,, etc. vs. his own pet themes: individuality, fighting against cultural homogeneity, tortured heroes, Gothic romance, free will, choice, outsiders caught between worlds that don't fit into either, etc. His sexy visual sensibility informs the film's every frame, but it's different from Mingnola's much darker, more...what's the word (cannot think of one right now)...comics. The first film was fun, but it didn't fulfill anywhere near as much potential is it could given the deep mythology of the comics. But this was only natural given the restrictions it was under, especially kick-starting a new franchise. Like Raimi and Donner in his original films, del Toro had huge reverence for his source materials and characters, as opposed to Nolan and Singer and Burton, who came to their respective characters with less experience one hand, but less baggage on the other. Blade, Spider-Man, and X-Men all suffered similar problems, and all three franchises really got the opportunity to cut loose in their second installments (only to flounder horribly in their respective thirds). Hopefully, Hellboy II will do the same. Hope I'm not coming across too foolishly. I'm nowhere near as erudite as yourself :).

But then, maybe you've just grown bored with comic-book films in the same way that fantasy was burnt out in the post-Conan and post-Star Wars 80s, martial arts and Hong Kong styling after The Matrix, CG after Pixar, etc.?

[mr.happy]

Blade, Spider-Man, and X-Men all suffered similar problems, and all three franchises really got the opportunity to cut loose in their second installments (only to flounder horribly in their respective thirds). Hopefully, Hellboy II will do the same.Cut loose and set up a horribly floundering third installment? ;)


Hope I'm not coming across too foolishly. I'm nowhere near as erudite as yourself :).You've kind of made me want to check out Hellboy, so you must be doing something right.

[Hanshotfirst113]

Cut loose and set up a horribly floundering third installment? ;)

Well, it's a problem that afflicted the original Star Wars films as well ;). I think that in crafting a piece of genre filmmaking, your key should be with the details of the world. All of the classic of the genre-The Road Warrior, the Star Wars films, Star Trek (which kind of ultimately fell into the black hole of its own mythology, opening things up too deep, but I digress), Blade Runner, LOTR (largely stemming from Tolkien), Harry Potter (the books, anyways, as with the exception of Cuaron's film, most of them skimp on making the world itself a character), Cameron's Terminator films, Buffy and Angel, Children of Men, Lovecraft, and virtually of the ridiculously convoluted universes which characterize comics-are a key part of this. Call it "style-over-substance" (an overused phrase, in my opinion, but I digress again), but the world is important, just as the characters are. Obviously, characters should be tantamount, but as they must live in these worlds, I think that that two tie together strongly. I think that that's why the Matrix sequels were so ill-received.


You've kind of made me want to check out Hellboy, so you must be doing something right.Well, as I say, I'm a huge fan of del Toro, so my perceptions are colored greatly, and I definately think that Hellboy is far from a great film, as it's got lots of potential that it squander, but it's still a hugely fun romp with loads of promise, IMO, and a huge valentine to genre fans. I'm morbidly curious what you'll think ;)...

[James]

Re Hellboy; I wasn't suggesting Del Toro was a bad movie maker or that Hellboy is terrible for a genre film (compared to some of the superhero terribleness), it was just another example of what Batman Begins and 99% of comics suffer from on the large screen: hollywooditis.

To me, the Hellboy comic smart takes on myths and fables with a contemporary hero driving the rich tapestry of magic and horror into a great blend of narrative story telling and quirky imagery. The film focused on the governmental secret covert group and then ran the tale into a Hollywood formula, making the hero far more romantically focused, the story more predictable and the whole thing very unrewarding. It wore the clothes of Hellboy, but ultimately, it could have been any Hollywood film. At least Del Toro's less commercially driven animated adventures have carried Hellboy into more familar waters of the comic, so he can prove what he can do through those DVDs where the demands of the film industry aren't so generic.

Again, its the trappings of commercialism and Summer blockbuster demand, but its why I tire of comic book films - they visually look like the comics these days, but rarely have stories that feel like the comics. Spider-Man has been the closest, and that's possibly because there is a lot in Spider-Man that makes a Hollywood formula; the romance, the quirky teen hero, big battles leading to an epic confrontation. For Spidey it works. However when Batman has to have a romantic interest (rare in the comics), focuses on cool gadgets, armour and cars, has to have an epic "save-the-city" finale, it all becomes a little out of tone - even when the filmmakers are doing the best.

I think that's why I have hope The Incredible Hulk will work, because at its simplest, like Spider-Man, the trappings work for Hollywood, which is why I was amazed at the ham-fisted mistakes of the first film. You have a gawky protagonist, you have the romance, you have the tragedy, you have big fights and you have a natural movement to an epic confrontation, all staple of Hulk comics and thereby should fit into a movie perfectly - so how poodle mutants, hammy fathers and gassy villains found their way into the first film is beyond me. Hulk writes itself for the Summer blockbuster - at least with Hellboy and Batman you can see that they don't naturally fall into the commercial formula as easily.

[Jacob T. Paschal]

I'd say Batman Begins hardly focused on any real gadgets and considering that he builds giant freaking eyeballs in skies I'd say Batman Begins was a whole lot more character focused, unliked the Tim Burton films.

[DarkAngel]

OT: DA, did you think SR was excellent?
:) Oh, yes. It's up there with Batman Returns and Batman Begins, the three representing my favorite of the superhero movies.

I don't really know much about the Hulk at all, so all I'll be looking for is a good, entertaining movie. Now I've seen some references here to a 26-minute fight. Is that a fact? If that's what the movie's building up to, then even if the rest of it isn't all that great, it might be worth checking out. With the previous movie, I found the opening 15-20 minutes to be dull and uninteresting. The middle chunk I thought was a vast improvement, but then that was all destroyed by a terrible ending.

If this new movie can do a decent enough job with suspense and pacing, and if that fight (is it really 26 minutes?) can stay consistently entertaining, then it could be a good time at the theater. Ed Norton's usually great, and I like Tim Roth, so I'm expecting we'll get some solid acting. To me, the pieces seem to be in place. Hopefully enough to wipe away memories of the other movie.

[Hanshotfirst113]

Re Hellboy; I wasn't suggesting Del Toro was a bad movie maker or that Hellboy is terrible for a genre film (compared to some of the superhero terribleness), it was just another example of what Batman Begins and 99% of comics suffer from on the large screen: hollywooditis.

Quite so, and I definately think that part of the challenge that every director faces is how work within that system or around it (or, in the case of people like Michael Bay, embrace it, for better or worse).


To me, the Hellboy comic smart takes on myths and fables with a contemporary hero driving the rich tapestry of magic and horror into a great blend of narrative story telling and quirky imagery. The film focused on the governmental secret covert group and then ran the tale into a Hollywood formula, making the hero far more romantically focused, the story more predictable and the whole thing very unrewarding.

Ah. I think that the film was forced to conform (by the difference of the two mediums or the necessities of a Hollywood film, take your pick), but I felt that the film was full of splashes of fantastic imagination (the Lovecraftian creatures, pretty much all of del Toro's magnificent aesthetics, the images of hell, the way that characters were reformatted [particularly Kronen], etc.) and a well-drawn central character (fueled by Perlman's magnificent performance), but that the Hollywood trappings ultimately bogged it down, making it lots of fun, but rather inhibited and limited in comparison to its potential (the same principle applied, on a much larger scale, the god-awful The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen film adaptation; indeed David Goyer's Blade film actually handled this well for their first two outings). Actually, it may be possible to read the way that things were handled as just that: all of the cool ideas and so forth forced to play into the background in favor of the formula. I didn't find Hellboy bad at all as much as unremarkable save for del Toro's usual dazzling visual sensibility. His little Mingola-esque touches (the dead Russian, Kronen, the creatures, the knockout makeup and effects, the various elements of the mythology that the film was ultimately unable to explore more full and only scratched the surface of) promised a much better film that we ultimately got, but I felt that on the whole, del Toro's sheer zesty love for the comics went a long way in making everything far more fun. He really did love his characters and universe, even in the shackles that they were forced to wear. I'd say A for effort, B for execution.


It wore the clothes of Hellboy, but ultimately, it could have been any Hollywood film.

Funny, I thought the exact opposite: it was an attempt to make a Hellboy story, but was forced into a costume that didn't fit by Hollywood. I thought that all of the characters, ideas, etc. were great, but they were crammed into the universe of the film. Square peg in round hole :p.


At least del Toro's less commercially driven animated adventures have carried Hellboy into more familar waters of the comic, so he can prove what he can do through those DVDs where the demands of the film industry aren't so generic.

At the cost of the budget, sadly enough. Probably why the DCAU got the characters far better than many of the live action films did.


Again, its the trappings of commercialism and Summer blockbuster demand, but its why I tire of comic book films - they visually look like the comics these days, but rarely have stories that feel like the comics.

Yeah, well, movies that look like comic books are a dime-a-dozen. They get the characters (Wolverine's badassery, Spider-Man's coming-of-age dilemmas, Hellboy's quirkiness, Batman's psychological complexity, Superman's struggle to fit in), but the two mediums are so unwieldy together (really, lots of the stuff that goes on in comics would, lets face it, look idiotic on the big screen). But then, the attempts to be as faithful as possible have been mixed too. Sin City and 300 both attempted such, but but both ultimately just came across as reading the books a second time. That's why the macho histrionics and and endless xenophobic fantasy of 300 bored me out of my skull. None of the set pieces had any verve, all coming right off of the pages (after LOTR, I have big expectations for battle scenes that 300 did not come close to), and all of the stuff in the comic that made its adolescent boy fantasy (and I'm in their target audience), which was such great pulp on the written page, came across as ludicrous to the point that my intelligence was practically offended :p. There's gotta be a happy medium. There's gotta be one somewhere.


Spider-Man has been the closest, and that's possibly because there is a lot in Spider-Man that makes a Hollywood formula; the romance, the quirky teen hero, big battles leading to an epic confrontation. For Spidey it works.

Good point, good point indeed.


However when Batman has to have a romantic interest (rare in the comics)

Quite so, and she annoyed the heck out me.


focuses on cool gadgets, armour and cars

I think that there was a conscious effort to subvert that, however. The attempts at giving Batman's various materials more earthbound origins (none of the gadgets were particularly outlandish, though Nolan really can't stage action set pieces with much verve, unlike del Toro, who take huge glee him the comic-book aestheticizaton of violence and makes it loads of fun, though both at least avoided the annoying Hong Kong cliches that plague films these days) was really an interesting touch in attempting to find a way around that.


has to have an epic "save-the-city" finale

Yes, but at least everything leading up to that was something much more complex than usual, and attempted to tie into it, even though we know that that was how things had to end (really, that's how lots of comics end, so...).


it all becomes a little out of tone - even when the filmmakers are doing the best.

Valid.


I think that's why I have hope The Incredible Hulk will work, because at its simplest, like Spider-Man, the trappings work for Hollywood, which is why I was amazed at the ham-fisted mistakes of the first film. You have a gawky protagonist, you have the romance, you have the tragedy, you have big fights and you have a natural movement to an epic confrontation, all staple of Hulk comics and thereby should fit into a movie perfectly - so how poodle mutants, hammy fathers and gassy villains found their way into the first film is beyond me. Hulk writes itself for the Summer blockbuster

Cracked.com says it well: "There seemed to be a real effort to make this comic book movie psychologically cogent and scientifically realistic (The Hulk is now the result of some kind of genetic nanobot tampering). The award-winning Ang Lee apparently saw a comic with Hulk body slamming a 747, screaming "HULK SMASH" and decided this would be a good vehicle to delve into psychological themes about what it means to be human."


at least with Hellboy and Batman you can see that they don't naturally fall into the commercial formula as easily.

True, but I think it wasn't for lack of trying on the part of the filmmakers.


I'd say Batman Begins hardly focused on any real gadgets and considering that he builds giant freaking eyeballs in skies I'd say Batman Begins was a whole lot more character focused, unliked the Tim Burton films.

Yeah I'm going with Jacob, Burton's films were sheer summer blockbuster funhouses with the themes and characters of the comics taking a backseat, though quite entertaining ones.

[Silly McGooses]

The Burton films are many things, but I never really think of them as sheer summer blockbusters--they're far to personal and thoughtful for that, especially Returns.

Good God, this thread has gotten off topic...

[James]

I'd say Batman Begins hardly focused on any real gadgets

Batman Begins is very focused on gadgets. The cape, the armour, the batmobile.. one of the key drives of the film is building up Wayne's "cool" arsenal.


and considering that he builds giant freaking eyeballs in skies I'd say Batman Begins was a whole lot more character focused, unliked the Tim Burton films.

.. but Burton wasn't looking to stylize as being close to the comics in any way. It wasn't part of the mandate and contexually it was a time when comics to the mainstream were more Adam West, despite the cult popularity of Miller. His is a more Elsewhere fairy tale - whether one likes it or not.

One could argue Burton was responsible for the strong focus on cool gadgets, given gadgets didn't play a massive part of comic Bruce's arsenal in quite the same way. But I'm not being critical about the application, simply that when I read a Batman comic, his gadgets are not really a big deal; the Batmobile is used as a car more often than not, aside from some UV, smoke pellets and the now more common batgrapple (again, I think Burton was partially responsible for its canon prominence), Batman's pretty much cloth, cape and stealth as a basic theme.

I'm not overtly knocking Nolan - mainstream culture loves "bond" gadgets, so the film uses them, but my point was its not really part of the comic's tone which tends to keep Batman as a far less technologically "cool" character; his gadgets in the comics play more a detective and surveillance role than an arsenal one.

Again, I'm not dissing the view of Nolan, just explaining why I didn't think it really grasped what Batman was about in the comics because it was trapped in appeasing a mainstream formulaic, "cool" weapons, things exploding market. I didn't for once suggest Burton was a closer vision to Batman than Nolan's - it isn't, pure and simple (as much as I love it).

[Jacob T. Paschal]

I'd say it makes sense for focus to be done on the developing of the Batman symbol and from the way you seem to have expressed it I thought you were trying to call Batman Begins' focus/use of gadgets to be Brosnan-Bond level of fantastic.

[James]

I'd say it makes sense for focus to be done on the developing of the Batman symbol and from the way you seem to have expressed it I thought you were trying to call Batman Begins' focus/use of gadgets to be Brosnan-Bond level of fantastic.

It wasn't really developing the Batman symbol though, was it? I mean, regardless of the occasionally bits of contemporary justification, Batman wore a cape, tights and swung with a rope. There was none of the special techno-qualities of the cape, the mechanics of the armour, the "tank" nature of the batmobile. What I found was it was creating the "Batman symbol" for the film franchise which has constantly focused on these elements, elements which aren't quintessential to what makes Batman, Batman.

As for whether "Batman" was typical Summer Blockbuster - of course it was, but in a different context existing in a different market demand - a demand which wasn't dominated by comic authenticity nor controlled - ironically - by the sheer growth of epic potential; with CG you can do anything, which means all films pretty much do the same thing; attempt to top each other with epic things-exploding battles. You didn't have that in '89, and with no visions of superheroes to compete with, Batman actually retains an ethereal and retrospectively fresh formula for a Hollywood Blockbuster (the focus on the villian, the fairy tale formula, the end finale being a more personal encounter than a world/city defying one with few things exploding).

But I digress, I wasn't trying to pit Batman against Batman Begins - I was just pointing out as the latter was sold on its comic authenticity, the mainstream formula forced it to obey as many hollywood demands as it did comic ones.

As for Hulk, I think Ang Lee's film suffered - as I recall from studio interference, with Ang wanting to push the psychological with the dad arc, and the studio wanting HULK SMASH. I think the mistake was the HULK SMASH arc naturally has room for the psychological - you don't need a father arc to find that. You have the intimate human drama and the ramifications of the illness through Betty and Bruce's dynamic - you didn't need dad. And that's what I found mystifying in Ang's film - the psychological element WAS being played out without Dad and absorbing Man, between Betty and Bruce we were seeing the drama of the human schism being born out with Bruce's loathing for his curse and the stated thrill he also enjoyed. It didn't need Ang's dad plot. It was simply, over complicated with elements the story was NATURALLY exploring! :)

[DarkAngel]

You didn't have that in '89, and with no visions of superheroes to compete with, Batman actually retains an ethereal and retrospectively fresh formula for a Hollywood Blockbuster (the focus on the villian, the fairy tale formula, the end finale being a more personal encounter than a world/city defying one with few things exploding).
I'm sorry, James, but I still see you choosing to see Batman in one way and Begins in another. With Joker attempting to gas the people of Gotham, you still had the city in danger aspect. And things coming down to Batman vs Joker in a "more personal encounter" seems hardly different than Batman throwing down vs Ra's at the end of BB. Yeah, I know, we had "things exploding" such as the elevated train. But I seem to recall the Batwing going up in flames in Batman. And a MASSIVE explosion at the factory. I just don't think you're being fair.


It didn't need Ang's dad plot.
That's a nice, succinct way of putting it. That really threw me. Especially with his transformation at the end.

What stunned me is that I thought the movie had received good reviews. That's why I went to see it (and because there was nothing else out at the time that seemed worth seeing :) ). Was I wrong, or was the movie well-received critically? Because I was stunned by what I was seeing on-screen. I had expected better. Now, none of this is to suggest Hulk is a bad movie. Maybe I just didn't get it. I just expected something different based on what I thought I remembered critics saying.

[James]

I'm sorry, James, but I still see you choosing to see Batman in one way and Begins in another. With Joker attempting to gas the people of Gotham, you still had the city in danger aspect.

Narratively its the finale; its not the cumulation of the movie events. Its actually a segue to a personal encounter with the Joker. And the city isn't in quite as much danger in Batman as BB. Let's face it, the Joker isn't looking to destroy Gotham, he's looking for an excuse to show off and wheedle out the Batman. It's personal, and to me, Batman is more about personal encounters.

Ra's interest in Batman is secondary to his desire to destroy Gotham. We're talking epic stuff here; saving the city with seconds to spare as the criminals run amok. Its a far bigger theme. And while these themes aren't unheard of in the comics (No Mans Land was pretty apocalyptic), I just don't feel they are quintessentially Batman.

Again, I'm not looking to prove Batman is the better "Batman" movie, I'm simply saying that Batman Begins, mooted as the closest comic adaptation of Batman, failed to really hit the mark for me in that context because it was constrained by the Hollywood demands on Summer Blockbuster and the expensive Superhero genre.


And things coming down to Batman vs Joker in a "more personal encounter" seems hardly different than Batman throwing down vs Ra's at the end of BB.

BB finale is about Ra's vendetta reign of destruction on Gotham to which Batman gets in the way. The films not really about the personal deadlock between the two enemies, in fact Ra's is kept quite as being the enemy till the final act. Batman is about Bruce making the Joker who was the man who made Batman. Joker is looking to top the Batman, and Batman is looking to stop the Joker and eventually make Napier pay. It's a very fairy tale bonding between the protagonist and antagonist which makes for a very different finale. Sure the explosions are there - but this is an action film. The point is the crash of the Batwing isn't really part of the final acts' dramatic formula, while BB's finale is layer on layer of action drama all building up to the potential destruction of the city.

As far as the films are built to formula - and that's the key here - Batman's fairy tale formula does not carry the wider epic threat that superhero movies like to carry these days (city/continent/world about to be destroyed). Its more low key which actually in some respects plays closer homage to the more personal stories of Batman, even if the overall dressing and characters are no where as close homage to the comics as Batman Begins.

Again, I'm not looking to pit each of these films against each other. IMO, both carry close connections to the comics, though I think BB are more overt. I'm simply noting how BB failings IMO come down to the need to follow the contemporary blockbuster formula than allowing it to play a far more intimate and darker affair that is akin to many of the comic stories. If Burton's had been done now, it would probably have suffered the same genre expectations. It's not an attack on Nolan, simply stating its a sign of the times.

[Knight]

Back to the Incredible Hulk.

Saw the trailer in the theatre when I went to see Doomsday and I have to say I the scene where Hulk and the Abomination go heads up is pretty cool. Does anyone know what that theme is that is playing during that scene? I know I have heard it somewhere else before.

[James]

What stunned me is that I thought the movie had received good reviews. That's why I went to see it (and because there was nothing else out at the time that seemed worth seeing :) ). Was I wrong, or was the movie well-received critically? Because I was stunned by what I was seeing on-screen. I had expected better. Now, none of this is to suggest Hulk is a bad movie. Maybe I just didn't get it. I just expected something different based on what I thought I remembered critics saying.

Same here. I recall a few decent reviews to start and then they began to slide.. after I'd seen the film. I can't recall the commentary but it was one of those films which started off with people being positive, and ended with very negative. I think the truth was somewhere inbetween.

[The Clown Prince]

Same here. I recall a few decent reviews to start and then they began to slide.. after I'd seen the film. I can't recall the commentary but it was one of those films which started off with people being positive, and ended with very negative. I think the truth was somewhere inbetween.

Well, all this talk of reviews prompted a trip to RottenTomatoes to see how Ang Lee's 2003 Hulk did. Out of 218 counted reviews, 134 were good while 84 were bad bringing it's percentage to 61%. It'll be fun to see how this new film will do critically compared to the 2003 version.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/hulk/

Box office wise it did $132.1 million domestically with a worldwide total of $245.3 million. Budget in 2003 dollars was $137 million. I don't have a "Premiere Pass" at Box Office Mojo so I don't know what the inflation on the budget would be.

[Spider-Man]

The theatrical one-sheet for The Incredible Hulk has been released:


http://blog.newsarama.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/hulk_poster.jpg

http://blog.newsarama.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/hulk_poster.jpg

Comments?

[Beat]

Why do I see this film ending with Norton on a road somewhere, hitchiking while the "Lonely Man" song plays in the background?

I know little about how the plot will play out, but I bet that's the ending right there.

[James]

His outfit and bag are very Bill Bixby reminisent!

[Michael24]

Yeah, I was just about to say, even though this is a "relaunch" but still a sequel to the first, I was wondering if it would start with Banner hitchhiking out on the road somewhere. Would be very cool. Between this and Iron Man, I'm totally pumped for some slam-bang superhero movies this summer. :D

[Hanshotfirst113]

Yeah, I was just about to say, even though this is a "relaunch" but still a sequel to the first, I was wondering if it would start with Banner hitchhiking out on the road somewhere. Would be very cool. Between this and Iron Man, I'm totally pumped for some slam-bang superhero movies this summer. :D

Yeah, my 21st B-day is gonna be on hell of a summer :D:D!

[Young Justice]

Yeah, I was just about to say, even though this is a "relaunch" but still a sequel to the first, I was wondering if it would start with Banner hitchhiking out on the road somewhere. Would be very cool. Between this and Iron Man, I'm totally pumped for some slam-bang superhero movies this summer. :D

It's been a while that we've read some rumors the movie will start with Banner in a slum in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The first movie ended with Bruce in a Spanish speaking Latin-American nation. It makes sense for Banner to go even further south and stay in Brazil.

[Spider-Man]

Over at Entertainment Weekly (http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20191802,00.html), Ed Norton has made a statement about the supposed production troubles on The Incredible Hulk. Here is his statement:


"Like so many people I've loved the story of The Hulk since I was a kid, so it was thrilling when Marvel asked me to write and help produce an altogether new screen incarnation, as well as play Bruce Banner. I grew up reading Marvel Comics and always loved the mythic dimension and contemporary themes in the stories, and I’m proud of the script I wrote. In every phase of production, including the editing, working with Louis Leterrier has been wonderful...I've never had a better partner, and the collaboration with all the rest of the creative team has been terrific. Every good movie gets forged through collaboration, and different ideas among people who are all committed and respect the validity of each other's opinions is the heart of filmmaking. Regrettably, our healthy process, which is and should be a private matter, was misrepresented publicly as a 'dispute,' seized on by people looking for a good story, and has been distorted to such a degree that it risks distracting from the film itself, which Marvel, Universal and I refuse to let happen. It has always been my firm conviction that films should speak for themselves and that knowing too much about how they are made diminishes the magic of watching them. All of us believe The Incredible Hulk will excite old fans and create new ones and be a huge hit...our focus has always been to deliver the Hulk that people have been waiting for and keep the worldwide love affair with the big green guy going strong.''

Everything can be found here including a new picture:

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20191802,00.html

[Michael24]

Woah! I don't think I'd read that Norton was actually involved in writing the script. Interesting. Also sounds like he's quite the comic buff, which I also didn't know. Can't wait. :)

[Young Justice]

I've just read a news article in a major newspaper here in Brazil (O Globo) that states Tony Stark will have a minor part or at least a cameo in "The Incredible Hulk" paving the way that could lead to an "Avengers" movie by the next year or at least 2010.

Anyone confirms that?

[Silly McGooses]

Yeah, people have been talking about that for a while. If memory serves, Samuel L. Jackson is going to have a small role as Nick Fury in both...

[Michael24]

I mentioned this over in the Iron Man thread, but apparently Jackson's cameo has been cut from that film and will probably have to wait for the DVD release to turn up. :(

[Tash]

I've just read a news article in a major newspaper here in Brazil (O Globo) that states Tony Stark will have a minor part or at least a cameo in "The Incredible Hulk" paving the way that could lead to an "Avengers" movie by the next year or at least 2010.

Anyone confirms that?
Iron Man in the Hulkbuster armor is in the movie tie-in Incredible Hulk game, so that supports it somewhat.

[Russkafin]

I've just read a news article in a major newspaper here in Brazil (O Globo) that states Tony Stark will have a minor part or at least a cameo in "The Incredible Hulk" paving the way that could lead to an "Avengers" movie by the next year or at least 2010.

Anyone confirms that?

http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=154289 Consider it confirmed... the footage was shown at the NYC Comic Con!

(Beware spoilers - they describe the scene in detail!)

[Spider-Man]

Some new The Incredible Hulk images via Empire Online (http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=22410):


http://www.empireonline.com/images/cover/large/10.jpg

http://www.empireonline.com/images/cover/large/9.jpg

[Jacob T. Paschal]

I'm looking forward to how Norton and Tyler will work out as the new Bruce Banner and Betty Ross.

[Spider-Man]

New images from Yahoo! Movies (http://movies.yahoo.com/slideshows/generic/theincrediblehulk.html).

http://us.ent4.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/universal_pictures/the_incredible_hulk/hulk_slide19.jpg

http://us.ent4.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/universal_pictures/the_incredible_hulk/hulk_slide20.jpg

http://us.ent4.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/universal_pictures/the_incredible_hulk/hulk_slide23.jpg

There's more here:

http://movies.yahoo.com/slideshows/generic/theincrediblehulk.html

[Wonderwall]

Hulk and Abomination look sweet, kinda wish Sam Elliot was still Ross but the new guy looks alright, Liv Tyler is still as hot as ever. I notice that the pics of Hulk and Abomination are the same from the trailer, I hope they fight more than just once in the movie. I just don't want it to lack action like the first one.

[Spider-Man]

The new The Incredible Hulk trailer is now online!

Quicktime large:
http://www.apple.com/trailers/universal/theincrediblehulk/large.html

All formats:
http://www.apple.com/trailers/universal/theincrediblehulk/

[Young Justice]

The new The Incredible Hulk trailer is now online!

Quicktime large:
http://www.apple.com/trailers/universal/theincrediblehulk/large.html


Amazing trailer. It was nice too see the shootings from Rio de Janeiro in the trailer. I'm betting the beginning of the movie will be awsome.

The action sequence between Hulk and the soldier was awesome as well. What was weak in the first (action) seems to be the strong in this movie. Let's hope the opposite is not true: The first have a lot of character and emotional development and I hope this new one is not a no-brainer action movie.

I'm kinda sad to knew by the trailer that Ross is the mind behind Abomination creation. I was hoping to see a Leader forecast for the 3rd movie.

[FightingDreamer]

VERY nice trailer. I'm still not as hyped for this as, say, Iron Man (which I want to see SO FREAKING BAD, but my current work schedule doesn't seem to allow it) or Hellboy II, but it definitely hits a stronger note than the teaser trailer.

[Michael24]

Now that looks like a Hulk movie. I'm officially excited for this one now. :)

[ShadowGUN]

Hulk Smash!!! :evil:
That trailer was freaking sweet.

[Hanshotfirst113]

Don't even get me started on Liv Taylor and the rest of the cast.

You're not a fan of Liv, I see :p. Is it just me, or do Norton and Hurt look half-asleep in the trailer :p?

[Michael24]

I've never really been a fan of Norton, but for some reason, I'm really liking him in this.

And Liv Tyler... :nurse:

[Spider-Man]

A bunch of new Incredible Hulk pictures are up.


http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s42/indirav1/hulk-may11-7.jpg

http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s42/indirav1/hulk-may11-11.jpg

http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s42/indirav1/hulk-may11-6.jpg

http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s42/indirav1/hulk-may11-8.jpg

http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s42/indirav1/hulk-may11-9.jpg


http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s42/indirav1/hulk-may11-10.jpg

http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s42/indirav1/hulk-may11-2.jpg

http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s42/indirav1/hulk-may11-3.jpg

http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s42/indirav1/hulk-may11-5.jpg



http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s42/indirav1/hulk-may11-1.jpg

http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=14787633&postcount=1775
http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=14787633&postcount=1776

The last picture in the batch is supposed to contain a nod to Captain America (like the cameo of Cap's shield in Iron Man). The Super-Soldier Serum is used in the above scene and apparently hels create the Abomination.

Also, apparently a new Hulk trailer was featured before select prints of Speed Racer and should be online soon.

[Young Justice]

...a nod to Captain America (like the cameo of Cap's shield in Iron Man).

What? I've seen the Iron Man movie, but missed this cameo. Care to clarify? Please use the spoilers tag, because we are in the Hulk topic, you know. Thanks a lot.

[Spider-Man]

http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s42/indirav1/hulk-may11-1.jpg

http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=14787633&postcount=1775
http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=14787633&postcount=1776

The last picture in the batch is supposed to contain a nod to Captain America (like the cameo of Cap's shield in Iron Man). The Super-Soldier Serum is used in the above scene and apparently hels create the Abomination.

To avoid spoilers in this thread and to keep this thread on-topic, I'll post a link to the article that first talked about the Captain America nod in Iron Man. The article can be found here (http://www.firstshowing.net/2008/05/09/captain-americas-shield-found-in-iron-man/) and the talkback for the Iron Man movie is here (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=210079).

I read at Marvel.com I think that TV spots and promotions for The Incredible Hulk will start on May 19th and be pretty agressive.

Any comments on the new pics?

[Hanshotfirst113]

Woah! I don't think I'd read that Norton was actually involved in writing the script. Interesting. Also sounds like he's quite the comic buff, which I also didn't know. Can't wait. :)

Surprises me, to be sure. Never would have pegged Norton as such.


I've just read a news article in a major newspaper here in Brazil (O Globo) that states Tony Stark will have a minor part or at least a cameo in "The Incredible Hulk" paving the way that could lead to an "Avengers" movie by the next year or at least 2010.

Anyone confirms that?

That's what I've heard. God, these months go by slowly.


I mentioned this over in the Iron Man thread, but apparently Jackson's cameo has been cut from that film and will probably have to wait for the DVD release to turn up. :(

Incorrecto. He is there indeed!



A bunch of new Incredible Hulk pictures are up.

Ah, the rain-drenched kiss. Always a melodrama staple, evidently.


The last picture in the batch is supposed to contain a nod to Captain America (like the cameo of Cap's shield in Iron Man). The Super-Soldier Serum is used in the above scene and apparently hels create the Abomination.Intriguing.


Also, apparently a new Hulk trailer was featured before select prints of Speed Racer and should be online soon.I WANT IT NOW!!


What? I've seen the Iron Man movie, but missed this cameo. Care to clarify? Please use the spoilers tag, because we are in the Hulk topic, you know. Thanks a lot.

Yes, I echo this. I must've missed that.

[Spider-Man]

The third The Incredible Hulk trailer is up at dose.ca (http://canwest.a.mms.mavenapps.net/mms/rt/1/site/canwest-doseca-pub01-live/current/launch.html?maven_playerId=all&maven_referralPlaylistId=9cfa9871659702a84281cf5ca91325957d073247&maven_referralObject=137484)!

http://canwest.a.mms.mavenapps.net/mms/rt/1/site/canwest-doseca-pub01-live/current/launch.html?maven_playerId=all&maven_referralPlaylistId=9cfa9871659702a84281cf5ca91325957d073247&maven_referralObject=137484

I am sure a high-quality version will be up soon.

[Hanshotfirst113]

The third The Incredible Hulk trailer is up at dose.ca (http://canwest.a.mms.mavenapps.net/mms/rt/1/site/canwest-doseca-pub01-live/current/launch.html?maven_playerId=all&maven_referralPlaylistId=9cfa9871659702a84281cf5ca91325957d073247&maven_referralObject=137484)!

http://canwest.a.mms.mavenapps.net/mms/rt/1/site/canwest-doseca-pub01-live/current/launch.html?maven_playerId=all&maven_referralPlaylistId=9cfa9871659702a84281cf5ca91325957d073247&maven_referralObject=137484

I am sure a high-quality version will be up soon.

Not much that's new :(.....

[Spider-Man]

There's a new international poster for The Incredible Hulk:

http://s1.subirimagenes.com/otros/468985theincrediblehulk200.jpg
http://s1.subirimagenes.com/otros/468985theincrediblehulk200.jpg

The image was taken from IGN:

http://movies.ign.com/dor/objects/569136/the-incredible-hulk/images/the-incredible-hulk-20080514053023597.html

The international release date seems to be June 12th.

[Michael24]

Cool poster. After the disappointing Iron Man, I really hope this one rocks. I've been disappointed by most comic book movies in the last few years.

(Mod Note: Click here (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=210079) to discuss the live-action "Iron Man" feature film! Please keep this thread on-topic!)

[RonDrakenfan17]

I can't wait for this film. Its also pretty cool that Iron Man will make a cameo, so cool :D

[Russkafin]

I wonder if the Tony Stark cameo will be a post-credits scene, like the Nick Fury scene in Iron Man?

[RonDrakenfan17]

I wonder if the Tony Stark cameo will be a post-credits scene, like the Nick Fury scene in Iron Man?

I heard on the Super Heroe forums that it will be after the credits :)
But it would have been so cool if he was in the movie, but than Hulk fans would be disapointed they just want Hulk going nutts in the film. Just like how I don't want any big super Heroe team ups in Iron Man 2 and just want to see Iron Man/Tony Stark kick other villains ass.

[Hanshotfirst113]

Cool poster. After the disappointing Iron Man, I really hope this one rocks. I've been disappointed by most comic book movies in the last few years.

You're going to have to be the contrarian here ;).

Personally, what has me so wary is the director. The Transporter guy? Seems an odd choice....

[ShadowGUN]

The tv spots are online (http://movies.ign.com/dor/objects/569136/the-incredible-hulk/videos/hulk_CONTROL_UPHN_3011.html). I like the "Good" one. Seems pretty epic.

[Silly McGooses]

Those TV spots are actually getting me sorta pumped for this movie...who knows, it could surprise me. And the general public. A month ago, I thought this was a garunteed bomb, now I think it could do moderately well. Like, half of what Iron Man is doing right now.

[Hanshotfirst113]

Love that spooky shot of Norton with the creepy smirk and glowing green eyes staring the camera down, I must say.

[Anarky]

There's a new international poster for The Incredible Hulk:

http://s1.subirimagenes.com/otros/468985theincrediblehulk200.jpg
http://s1.subirimagenes.com/otros/468985theincrediblehulk200.jpg

The image was taken from IGN:

http://movies.ign.com/dor/objects/569136/the-incredible-hulk/images/the-incredible-hulk-20080514053023597.html

The international release date seems to be June 12th.

I find it comical there's a man named "Hurt" sarring in this film.
I just saw the new trailer this afternoon during the Iron Man screening.
Hopefully people will get over their dislike for Lee's film and get their cans to the theatres for this feature.

[Spider-Man]

The score for The Incredible Hulk will be released on June 20th, according to Amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/Incredible-Hulk-Soundtrack-Craig-Armstrong/dp/B0019SMSUM/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1211291523&sr=8-5

The CGI looks to have been upgraded too:

http://www.firstshowing.net/img/hulk-CGI-comparison.jpg

http://www.firstshowing.net/2008/05/17/the-hulks-cgi-finally-gets-upgraded/

[Angilasman]

Love that spooky shot of Norton with the creepy smirk and glowing green eyes staring the camera down, I must say.

These TV spots I've been seeing the last few days are so much better than the theatrical trailers! How did that happen?

[ShadowGUN]

A clip (http://www.mtv.com/overdrive/?id=1588023&vid=235404)of the Hulk being attack by puny humans.

[Knight]

I wonder if we are going to get some dialoge out of the Hulk. I want to hear "Hulk Smash" atleast once.

[ShadowGUN]

I wonder if we are going to get some dialoge out of the Hulk. I want to hear "Hulk Smash" atleast once.

It been mention (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=44255) that Lou Ferrigno might voiced the Hulk in the movie.



He then asked Ferrigno, who never spoke as the Hulk on the original live action show but provided the voice for the Hulk in the 1996 cartoon, to give the audience a sample of his "Hulk Smash!" which prompted Letterier to offer Ferrigno a job doing just that for the movie. This seemed far too staged to be an impromptu job offer, but indeed, it seems like whatever the Hulk might say in the movie, that voice will indeed be provided by Lou Ferrigno.


Hopefully he will say "Hulk smash punny Banner" :evil: .

[Jacob T. Paschal]

You know what would make this and sequels really cool? Is if Banner and Hulk met in a 'conference room' whenever they confronted each other over things like "We're doing this", "No, Hulk say we do this", "I'll give you a yogurt!" "Hulk say damn punny Banner...Hulk still accept yogurt, though."

I've got a wild sense of humor.

[Knight]

It been mention (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=44255) that Lou Ferrigno might voiced the Hulk in the movie.




Hopefully he will say "Hulk smash punny Banner" :evil: .

Nice. I missed that. If the movie is sucessful maybe we will get The more intelligent green Hulk that the comics have had the last few years as well.

[ShadowGUN]

Here go people, a clip of the Hulk vs the Abomination (http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1808495230/video/7950136)and from the looks of it the director has been playing The Hulk: Ultimate Destruction video game :) .

Edit- Another clip with Blonksy taking on the Hulk (http://movies.ign.com/dor/objects/569136/the-incredible-hulk/videos/hulk_blonskybattleshulk_022308.html). Damn he is good.

[Knight]

That was nice. That must be Blonsky right after he takes the super solider formula so he is basically like Captain America at that stage. And The Abomination battle looks to be good. The CGI looks pretty good as well.

[Hanshotfirst113]

Are they involving the Super-Soldier Formula in this to set up for Captain America?

[Knight]

Are they involving the Super-Soldier Formula in this to set up for Captain America? From what Ihave seen the super solider formula they use on Blonsky is referenced as having been used back during a World War II weapons program but their are side affects to this version (which lead to the Abomination transformation I would figure).

[Hanshotfirst113]

Here go people, a clip of the Hulk vs the Abomination (http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1808495230/video/7950136)and from the looks of it the director has been playing The Hulk: Ultimate Destruction video game :) .

Edit- Another clip with Blonksy taking on the Hulk (http://movies.ign.com/dor/objects/569136/the-incredible-hulk/videos/hulk_blonskybattleshulk_022308.html). Damn he is good.

Not bad. The whole "Hulk is going to use metal stuff as shields (no pun intended)" thing looks like it might be driven into the ground, but the CGI looks, by all accounts, pretty good. The acrobatics are nice (good to see that Leterrier is using some traditional stunt work in addition to CGI, which is good in my book).


That was nice. That must be Blonsky right after he takes the super solider formula so he is basically like Captain America at that stage. And The Abomination battle looks to be good. The CGI looks pretty good as well.

Indeed. Looks like the Abomination in this incarnation retain Blonsky's mind/personality, and as such, I wonder how they'll use him. I'm still a bit wary about whether or not I want to see them duke it out for a half-hour, and the new design for the Abomination is a touch odd, but on the whole, I'm interested. Looks like they've finally found a superhero who fits the Hollywood formula to T.


From what I have seen the super solider formula they use on Blonsky is referenced as having been used back during a World War II weapons program but their are side affects to this version (which lead to the Abomination transformation I would figure).

"Side effects may include turning into a giant monster and destroying Los Angles. Super Soldier Formulas and Gamma Rays are not for everyone, those nursing, pregnant, or who may become pregnant. Talk to your doctor to see if they are right for you :p:D!"

Minor side effects, for sure, but it looks his transformation will involve a bit more as well. I'm reasonably interested at this stage. They could definately mess up, but judging from the trailers and the footage we've seen, I'm going with some optimism here. Lots of potential. Wonder if they'll involve S.H.I.E.L.D.?

[Spider-Man]

According to Dark Horizons (http://www.darkhorizons.com/news08/080527a.php), the movie has a 112 minute running time.

A fourth clip has also appeared online:

http://movies.aol.com/movie/the-incredible-hulk/26921/main

[ShadowGUN]

A fifth clip (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=45441)plus the American Gladiator promo.

[Hanshotfirst113]

What fifth clip? It's just an AG promo. Though things look pretty slick so far, I must say.

[ShadowGUN]

What fifth clip? It's just an AG promo. Though things look pretty slick so far, I must say.

Did you click on the link that says "via this link"?
Anyway here direct link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKi6dNAt-z4) to the "Confrontation" clip.

[Hanshotfirst113]

Did you click on the link that says "via this link"?
Anyway here direct link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKi6dNAt-z4) to the "Confrontation" clip.

*dueling banjos plays*
Now I feel smart :p. Thanks though. Pretty cool looking clip too.

[Spider-Man]

Two more clips are online:

http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4968&Itemid=99

Clip #1 and #5 are the new ones.

Also, on the official site, there's a new trailer. Go to the videos section, scroll down and select the trailer called "Marvel."

http://incrediblehulk.marvel.com/index_flash.html

It's also directly available through Livevideo:

http://www.livevideo.com/video/098E57E1372C4DE0B75F6A35A0DD5F1D/incredible-hulk-tv-spot-marv.aspx

[Hanshotfirst113]

Marvel seems to want us to see the entire movie online before it actually comes out :p!

[bat313]

So has it been confirmed that this is a direct sequal to to first movie or is it a loosely based sequal to the first like Superman Returns was to Superman I and II?

[Michael24]

I thought Avi Arad cleared it all up months ago. He said it's a sequel to the first film, just with a different style, the way Aliens is still a sequel to Alien despite their stylistic differences. :)

[Young Justice]

I thought Avi Arad cleared it all up months ago. He said it's a sequel to the first film, just with a different style, the way Aliens is still a sequel to Alien despite their stylistic differences. :)

I think Alien and Aliens are not the best example since they were able to maintain the main cast, i.e. Sigourney Weaver.

I think Batman Returns and Batman Forever is a better analogy, the latter is still a sequel for the former, but with different actor for the reading role and a very different style altogether. Of course, Forever had the same actors in the roles of Alfred and commissioner Gordon, and this Incredible Hulk movie has changed almost all actors in almost all roles, but still...

[Michael24]

True enough, I suppose, but I thought the Alien/Aliens analogy got the basic point across. I think both comparisons probably work. :)

Either way, I'm looking forward to this one.

[ShadowGUN]

Look like besides growling, Lou Ferrigno will say a couple of lines in the movie as the Hulk (http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=158667)which is awesome. I never did like the fact that in the first movie, Hulk didn't really said anything.

[Young Justice]

Look like besides growling, Lou Ferrigno will say a couple of lines in the movie as the Hulk (http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=158667)which is awesome. I never did like the fact that in the first movie, Hulk didn't really said anything.

Hulk Smash!

[bat313]

True enough, I suppose, but I thought the Alien/Aliens analogy got the basic point across. I think both comparisons probably work. :)

Either way, I'm looking forward to this one.

Thanks guys! I wasn't sure where to look for the answer and i was getting tired of going through all the pages of the talkback. This should be a interesting movie. Usually my favorite part is the "origin" of the character so hopefully they will have a great story this time!

[Young Justice]

Thanks guys! I wasn't sure where to look for the answer and i was getting tired of going through all the pages of the talkback. This should be a interesting movie. Usually my favorite part is the "origin" of the character so hopefully they will have a great story this time!

This movie likely will portray the origin of Abomination. It's not the main character origin but it is still an origin, so I think you will enjoy it.

[ShadowGUN]

There a new spoilers fill TV spots out. One of them has Hulk "smashing" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oeBYIuq27w) (YES! It about time) while another reveals the cameo of another Marvel hero (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOq0BD_Eiig) . For those who want to avoid spoilers, I recommend not watching TV till after June 12 :sweat: .

Look like a certain Avenger will have cameo (http://www.newsarama.com/comics/080607-CapHulkfilm.html) in the movie.

[Knight]

I cant wait until friday.

[Silly McGooses]

I cannot believe that I am actually, finally getting excited to see this film. It'll be fascinating to see what kind of money it will take in after what happened in 2003--regardless of whether this is a more accessable film, will it really be able to do significantly better after the first movie?

[PC!]

Is anyone else just...not seeing any commercials for this? I've only just recently started seeing them, about a week before release. Have I just been watching the wrong channels?

[Michael24]

I've been seeing an average of maybe 5-6 ads each evening on a few different channels for about the past two weeks. I definitely got the impression they had a big marketing push behind this thing.


while another reveals the cameo of another Marvel hero (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOq0BD_Eiig) .
I'm surprised they'd show it that much in a TV spot. I mean, I know the online fan community is already aware of such a cameo, but the casual fans and general audiences likely had no idea, so it would have been a nice surprise for them.

[Silly McGooses]

I'm surprised they'd show it that much in a TV spot. I mean, I know the online fan community is already aware of such a cameo, but the casual fans and general audiences likely had no idea, so it would have been a nice surprise for them.
It's a great way to get general audiences in the theater to begin with, with a character they're now familiar with, since getting those audiences into the theater is an uphill battle for this film.

[Hanshotfirst113]

It's a great way to get general audiences in the theater to begin with, with a character they're now familiar with, since getting those audiences into the theater is an uphill battle for this film.

Why? Superheros, explosions, big stars, special effect, all this pretty much guarantees an audience. The question is if it will have legs, especially with the taste that the first movie left in the mouths of many.

[Silly McGooses]

Marvel and Universal are rightfully concerned about how this will perform after the situation Universal had with Hulk in 2003. People aren't going to forget that very easily and it didn't do that incredibly even opening weekend, before word of mouth kicked in. The character is not neccessarily a huge draw and frankly I'm amazed that they would try again so quickly.

[Spider-Man]

A couple interesting newsbits:

-Director Louis Lettier says that over 70 minutes of deleted footage will be available on the upcoming DVD release for the movie. The info is below and it does spoil another Marvel character cameo:

http://www.collider.com/entertainment/interviews/article.asp/aid/8173/tcid/1

-Also, reviews are adding up at Rotten Tomatoes:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_incredible_hulk/

Opens Friday!

[Hanshotfirst113]

This had BETTER NOT be an HD/BR exclusive.

[James Harvey]

Bird Boy will have the official talkback for The Incredible Hulk up tonight at 12:01am midnight!

[Stu]

Having seen this movie at a preview today here in the UK, I thought I'd post a spoilerless review for those curious about the film.

Go see this film. And convince anyone you can to go with you. This film was incredible.

[Hanshotfirst113]

Go see this film. And convince anyone you can to go with you. This film was incredible.

Very clever :p.

[James Harvey]

Everyone will be able to post thoughts on The Incredible Hulk at 12:01am midnight (ET) tonight! Bird Boy will have the official talkback for The Incredible Hulk up tonight at 12:01am midnight!

[MM54]

You know, from the beginning, I was just never too pumped to see this movie at all. Now, one day before release, I'm actually finding myself incredibly (hey, I can make 'em too!) excited to see it. I never did care for the original which, while not terrible, was overlong and had WAY more exposition than needed for a franchise like this. I'm anxious to see where Norton, Penn and Letterier are taking this movie and how well it stacks up against the original.

Sadly, I won't get to see it til tomorrow evening. :sweat:

[tucsoncoyote]

And now a word from the star of the movie:
http://www.timvp.com/hulktoy2.jpg
The Incredible Hulk:Hulk like new 'reboot' of story. Hulk like everyone to go see my movie. It has action. It is not dark as last movie. Hulk thinks Ang Lee was whack. Hulk not like Ang Lee for last movie. Hulk likes new director. Hulk hopes to make mint off of movie, so Hulk can get 2 more sequels. So please fans, see Hulk Movie. Hulk won't let you down this time! Hulk will do everything hulk likes to do. What is it that Hulk like to do?(Slight Pause)...Hulk likes smashing things and, Hulk like to read poetry... After all, Hulk not as dumb as people think he is.. Hulk is of course thespian.:lol:


So Folks there you have it.. Go see this movie.. at least Hulk won't read poetry, but he will definitely tear up the town that's for sure.. After all Hulk does wreck it.. but hey if it gets 200 million? Well Hulk won't mind!


:coyote:

Note: Please move your discussions to the official feature film talkback (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=212296). Thank you.

Thread Closed.