Movie Review: The Incredible Hulk
It’s great to see that after all these attempts at comic book movies, after the highs of SPIDER-MAN 2 and the lows of DAREDEVIL, that people are finally starting to get it right. THE INCREDIBLE HULK gets it right, just like IRON MAN got it right and BATMAN BEGINS got it right and FANTASTIC FOUR got it all wrong.
The latest offering from Marvel Studios, THE INCREDIBLE HULK essentially reboots the franchise after Ang Lee’s admirable (but ultimately failed) prior attempt, HULK. The cast has been completely remade, but the characters are the same: General Ross (William Hurt), his daughter Betty (Liv Tyler), and the mild mannered scientist Bruce Banner (Edward Norton). Leave it to fanboys such as myself to debate the merits of Ang Lee’s HULK versus this new version, and the strengths and weaknesses of the two casts, but I will say this: TIH is what people want and expect from a movie about the Hulk. There is real romance and anguish between Betty and Bruce, there is real tension as Bruce continually flees the Army scientists, and there is real action as Hulk SMASHES and SMASHES. People get hurt. Buildings get wrecked and cars get flung. Remember the best bit of HULK? When Hulk hammer throws a tank, then smashes a tank with the muzzle of another? There is a ton of that here. It is what we want from the Hulk.
But more than this, TIH is true to the material. There is universe continuity here. This is a New York where Iron Man flies around and SHIELD runs things behind the scenes. Doubtlessly Spider-Man is out webslinging in the distance. TIH is filled with name-drops that just make sense, and it’s the first time I’ve seen a comic book movie be so immersive and true to its roots. Heck, they even got Bill Bixby and Lou Ferrigno! It’s just great to see source material treated with RESPECT, and to see it pay off so well. The difference isn’t superior CGI (indeed, a Hulk creature will always look like a cartoon), it’s a superior script executed with a good sense of momentum. Bruce runs from Brazil to New York and we are interested in every step.
I guess the best part about TIH isn’t the action or the Hulk Smashes or that business, so much as seeing real actors doing their jobs. Ed Norton is a great Bruce Banner. He evokes those key moods we associate with the character: loneliness, fear of self and a continual haunting. Tim Roth as Emil Blonsky is never physically intimidating based on muscle, but he bears himself as a real hunter and predator, and as such ends up a terrific villain. Even William Hurt seems to appear fleetingly as someone other than William Hurt, and Liv Tyler does not, in my opinion, appear to be pining for Aragorn at every turn.
So there you have it, true believers. The Hulk has shown itself to be a viable character with franchise possibilities. If Ang Lee had made TIH instead of his HULK, we’d probably have seen 4 Hulk movies by now.
Excelsior!
So how bad are the CGI? I’m surprised at the positive word of mouth. But the CGI in the commercials look really bad. Like worse than Spiderman 3 bad.
Comment by Clark — June 9, 2008 @ 11:44 pm
I saw it at the premiere and the CGI is not bad at all. The early trailers had unfinished CGI but this is top notch amazing f/x. IN a few scenes if you could pause the screen it be easy to pic it apart but in the context of the movie you don’t care it goes so fast and the CGI is the best I’ve ever seen at times especially in the close up’s and in the rain/water. Wow! Got to meet many people involved and took pics. I actually liked this one better than Iron Man. There’s tons of reviews all over the net and every single one is positive. Here’s my review and my pics with the director and everyone else.
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=6649183874
Comment by Advanced Dark — June 10, 2008 @ 12:11 am
Now that we’ve got the X-Men, Iron Man, Hulk, Spiderman, Fantastic Four + the mention of SHIELD here and there, it seems inevitable there will be a movie where Marvel will throw most or all the heroes into the mix.
I’m half expecting the Beyonder to show up at some point.
And yes, I’m looking forward to seeing the green guy on-screen.
Thanks for the review.
Comment by danithew — June 10, 2008 @ 7:54 am
Clark, the CGI is not bad at all, really, but nothing’s going to make you believe the Hulk is real.
It’s not better than Iron Man.
Comment by Supergenius — June 10, 2008 @ 8:51 am
Any visible reasons for Edward Norton’s ranting? Or were those resolved?
Comment by Tim J. — June 10, 2008 @ 8:58 am
What I keep hearing is that Marvel plans to release Captain American and Thor features, followed by an Avengers movie to bring all the other films together. I’m still skeptical that they can pull this off, but they seem to be 2 for 2 so far, so things are looking better than expected.
Comment by BTD Greg — June 10, 2008 @ 9:04 am
What worries me is this is so close on the heels of The Hulk, people aren’t going to go see it… all the more sad if this is really the better picture.
I know my knee-jerk reaction was “Didn’t they just make this movie?- especially since all the tie-in toys at Target look the same as a few years ago…
Comment by tracy m — June 10, 2008 @ 9:41 am
But the tie-in toys gave us Hulk Hands! How can anyone complain about Hulk Hands?
Comment by a random John — June 10, 2008 @ 10:11 am
Tim J., nothing I could see. It all seemed to work very well on-screen.
Comment by Supergenius — June 10, 2008 @ 10:32 am
Oh, no, not the Beyonder!
Comment by Brian G — June 10, 2008 @ 11:26 am
Now that they’ve got the Marvel to movie pattern down, they need to remember the rule: stop at sequel number 2 (or don’t make a sequel in the case of the FF).
So does this count as the second Hulk movie according to the rule, or did the “reboot” reset the counter for the green guy?
Just out of curiousity: why are so many people down on Ang Lee’s Hulk?
Comment by Bull Moose — June 10, 2008 @ 11:50 am
SG, you lucky bastard! I’m looking forward to it. The theater where I see most of my movies has this huge Hulk statue in the lobby, which has been whetting my anticipation.
Comment by Kevin Barney — June 10, 2008 @ 12:13 pm
Bull Moose, I think Ang Lee’s Hulk is a good Ang Lee movie, but not a very good Hulk movie, if you catch my meaning. It’s a meaningful insight into the ghosts of our pasts and the sins of the fathers. But it’s not a great action movie.
Comment by Supergenius — June 10, 2008 @ 12:35 pm
SG, I’ve got to disagree with you. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon is a good Ang Lee movie. Eat Drink Man Woman is a good Ang Lee movie. Brokeback Mountain is a good Ang Lee movie. Hulk is just a mess. It has one of the worst endings of any superhero movie I’ve ever seen (at least, any movie not directed by Joel Schumacher, anyway).
Comment by BTD Greg — June 10, 2008 @ 12:40 pm
I like Ang Lee’s Hulk but I agree with Steve. It’s not really a normal Hulk movie. The ending in particular is a bit too surreal. I think it’s mainly the pacing.
Comment by Clark — June 10, 2008 @ 12:40 pm
I’ve never really thought of “surreal” as a synonym for “horrible” before. Interesting.
Comment by BTD Greg — June 10, 2008 @ 12:45 pm
BTD, we’ll differ on Hulk, then — not the end of the world. I agree that it’s a mess, but I liked the ending (and like it more upon repeated viewings). Also agreed that the other three movies you mention are far superior to Hulk.
Comment by Supergenius — June 10, 2008 @ 12:46 pm
You watched it more than once!?!?!?
Comment by a random John — June 10, 2008 @ 1:00 pm
I saw it once in the theatre and once on DVD.
Comment by Clark — June 10, 2008 @ 1:25 pm
I own it, baby! In regular AND HD-DVD, no less.
Comment by Supergenius — June 10, 2008 @ 2:01 pm
Yeah, but did you buy it or was it a freebie Toshiba gave you? (And, more to the point, was it the disk you ordered from Toshiba)
Comment by Clark — June 10, 2008 @ 2:08 pm
BTW – speaking about Toshibas can I say that while my Toshiba was the best DVD player I’ve seen in terms of upscaling my Apple TV does much better with rips. They look amazingly good.
Comment by Clark — June 10, 2008 @ 2:08 pm
I trust your review, SG, but I’m only watching one superhero movie this year at the cinema and its Batman.
Comment by The Brit — June 10, 2008 @ 2:16 pm
I thought Ang Lee’s Hulk was awful.
In his movies, Ang Lee imbues physicality with a kind of fluid emotionality – my first way of saying this was that he feminizes physicality, including violence, but that didn’t quite say it. This worked surprisingly well in Crouching Tiger. In that movie it lended a lyricism to the action that was really lovely. But, the Hulk maybe wasn’t the best material for that treatment.
I just quizzed my wife on Brokeback Mountain, which I didn’t see, to find out if that movie was another example of the same phenomenon. She wasn’t sure what I was after at first, but described for me ‘the same fuzziness that is in all his movies. That seems like emotion but is at the same time distancing.’ She put into words what I experience with Ang Lee, that he lacks “something crisp” or “even blunt.” The Hulk seems like material that can use a little “blunt.”
I’m looking forward to seeing it!
~
Comment by Thomas Parkin — June 10, 2008 @ 2:20 pm
The action in Lee’s Hulk comes off almost as an afterthought. What’s key is the psychology. You’re point about it working in Crouching is good – although I thought things were more mixed there. (Good if perhaps overrated movie just like Hulk is bad but perhaps underrated)
You’re wife’s comments are good though. I think that ‘distancing’ worked in certain ways in the psychological drama. But I think most people wanted “Hulk Smash!” scenes. And it lacked that Jack Kirby charm.
Comment by Clark — June 10, 2008 @ 2:33 pm
If you’re going to make a Hulk movie and you don’t have “Hulk SMASH!” scenes from beginning to end, then you get an F. It could be the best movie ever in many ways and you still get an F.
Comment by a random John — June 10, 2008 @ 2:36 pm
To strengthen my point about blunt, I quote:
“Hulk angry. Hulk Smash.”
wheeeee …
~
Comment by Thomas Parkin — June 10, 2008 @ 2:37 pm
The internet just never ceases to amaze me.
~
Comment by Thomas Parkin — June 10, 2008 @ 2:38 pm
I liked Ang Lee’s Hulk, and all you haters can take a flying leap.
If you want Hulk Smash from beginning to end, the only place you’ll find that is in the mid-70s comics. Stan Lee and Jack Kirby had almost none of that in the 60s, and since the 80s, it’s been nothing but psychological drama.
And what about the Bixby TV series? Not much Hulk Smash there. In fact, almost none.
So whence this desire to have Hulk Smash all the time? It certainly doesn’t come from the source material.
Comment by Ivan Wolfe — June 10, 2008 @ 6:23 pm
That’s because it was TV and that would have been expensive. As a small child I was desperate enough to put up with that. The show is pretty much unbearable now.
Comment by a random John — June 10, 2008 @ 6:34 pm
Ivan, Hulk smashed plenty of space gladiators in the Kirby years. (My favorite)
Comment by Clark — June 10, 2008 @ 6:57 pm
Clark –
there was smashing going on, I won’t deny it. But all the time? Not really.
Plus, we’ve hashed this “Kirby years” thing out before, if you recall. The Kirby years are the first five issues (which only a minimal amount of smashing occurred) and then a brief run of one year from 1965 – 1966 (issue 69 – 83). Hardly “the Kirby years” more like “the Kirby year” – and even then, smashing was not as common as many people’s memories tell them. Go buy the archival DVD of the Hulk comics sometime and read the first few years worth. Smashing was not the most important or primary concern of most Hulk stories (Except in the 70s, for a brief period).
Methinks many people have distorted childhood memories, and the warped perspective causes them to overemphasize the importance of smashing to the Hulk. Frankly, the source material treated smashing (for the most part, depending on the writer and the artist, etc. etc.) as a secondary concern, if not an afterthought. I suggest actually reading the comics, and doing a panel by panel breakdown of smashing vs. non-smashing. Much of Kirby’s year or so as artist was filled with “bruce banner has a bullet in his brain and might die” angst, the Leader monolouging about gaining ultimate power, and soap opera character relationships among the secondary characters. It was hardly wall to wall smash festing.
The recent Planet Hulk/World War Hulk story arc had a lot of smashing, for example, but the real focus of the story was the anguish the Hulk had over losing his alien wife and their unborn son. Sounds more like an Ang Lee movie to me.
Comment by Ivan Wolfe — June 10, 2008 @ 7:19 pm
I dunno, World War Hulk was mostly about the Hulk beating the hell out of stuck-up superheroes.
Comment by Supergenius — June 10, 2008 @ 8:35 pm
I don’t think it was just smashing. Maybe it is my memories being distorted somewhat. However there definitely was smashing going on.
Comment by clark — June 10, 2008 @ 8:50 pm
Oh, of course there was smashing. I’m just arguing against the idea that the Hulk must be wall to wall Hulk SMASH! all the time. The smashing is there, just not the most prominent thing (except for certain storylines – but even in World War Hulk, the only Hero Hulk really smashed was Black Bolt. He used mind control gadgets to make the other heroes attack each other – the Hulk stood off to the side a lot and brooded over his lost wife).
Comment by Ivan Wolfe — June 10, 2008 @ 8:54 pm
They were all Skrulls anyhow.
Comment by Supergenius — June 10, 2008 @ 8:59 pm
They were all Skrulls anyhow.
He loves you.
(okay – will anyone other than Supergenius get that reference?)
Comment by Ivan Wolfe — June 10, 2008 @ 9:15 pm
hee! sooooooooo nerdy.
Comment by Supergenius — June 10, 2008 @ 9:27 pm
For the uninitiated.
Comment by Supergenius — June 10, 2008 @ 9:30 pm
Umm. Did the Skrulls used to be shapeshifters? I don’t recall that from my youth. (My favorite character was Captain Marvel who was a Kree opponent of the Skrulls – but then I stopped reading comics around 13)
Comment by clark — June 10, 2008 @ 11:33 pm
Clark, they have been from the get-go.
Comment by Supergenius — June 11, 2008 @ 12:09 am
Ed Norton is a great anything.
Comment by David J — June 11, 2008 @ 1:14 pm
Good point David.
Comment by Supergenius — June 11, 2008 @ 2:35 pm
I can also tell you that this was not in the version I saw.
Comment by Supergenius — June 11, 2008 @ 2:40 pm
Steve, this just goes to show that I shouldn’t try to have comic book discussions when I haven’t really read them since I was 12 or 13. It probably colors my memories too. I mean I loved the Six Million Dollar Man and then I saw one in repeats on TV and — ugh. What a stinker.
Comment by Clark — June 11, 2008 @ 4:03 pm
I, for one, can’t wait for NBC to bring back Misfits of Science, or at least roll it into Heros.
Comment by a random John — June 11, 2008 @ 5:04 pm
NBC to bring back Misfits of Science, or at least roll it into Heroes
THAT would be awesome. Also unlikely. But awesome.
Comment by Ivan Wolfe — June 12, 2008 @ 7:49 pm
Wasn’t that Courtney Cox’s first role before she joined Family Ties? (I have a very vague memory of seeing the pilot for Misfits of Science)
Comment by Clark — June 12, 2008 @ 8:24 pm
So we saw it tonight and Steve was right. It was surprisingly good – especially the first half. Very well directed. Through most of it they were smart to have the Hulk in the dark or the rain. A lesson introduced by Spielberg in the original Jurassic Park to make CGI look less obvious. But forgotten by almost everyone. Of course there is one “Hulk smash” sequence in the middle where there is daylight and that the CGI stands out. Not that badly though – no more than the first two Spiderman. (We’ll ignore the horrible CGI of the 3rd film)
It really captured a perfect tone and pacing. I was really skeptical going in despite all the positive word of mouth the past couple of weeks.
I suspect this will do so-so in the theater due to lots of competition and not a lot of buzz. But it’ll be killer on DVD.
Comment by Clark — June 13, 2008 @ 11:23 pm
Just got back and have to agree with Steve, it was great! Usually Brother Blah 2 and I have -ahem- somewhat differing movie tastes (he liked the first Hulk, I hated it). But we both really liked this one. I’m no action fan, so the big action sequence /fight scene at the end kinda bored me, but not excessively so. The first half was outstanding, I loved every minute in Brazil.
Overall I think it was very much on par with Iron Man, although Robert Downey Jr being just achingly hot in that movie gives it the edge for this moviegoer. (Norton isn’t bad, but Downey wins.)
Comment by sister blah 2 — June 14, 2008 @ 12:39 am
[...] [...]
Pingback by the hulk movie review — June 14, 2008 @ 3:07 am
SB2, agreed re: Brazil. What an amazing location — they could never have built a set like that.
Comment by Supergenius — June 14, 2008 @ 8:56 am
The cameos throughout the movie were really fun. Stan Lee, a still ridiculously huge Lou Ferrigno, one at the very end that I won’t spoil, and the one who sent BB2 to cameo heaven, Brazilian Jiu Jitsu legend Rickson Gracie (giving some martial arts mentoring to Bruce Banner in, appropriately, Brazil).
Also I couldn’t get enough of Banner’s fumbling with Portuguese, hilarious.
Comment by sister blah 2 — June 14, 2008 @ 10:29 am
i dunno man, this movie didn’t do much for me. this review says what i think:
http://eattheblinds.blogspot.com/
Comment by Niko — June 14, 2008 @ 2:52 pm
Ebert didn’t like it either although I don’t exactly trust his judgment on these sorts of movies. (He loved Crystal Skull).
Still some of what he said was accurate. The psychological drama of Ang’s film is missing. There was something compelling about this utterly repressed individual being able to completely let loose in his rage. This Hulk is more like the TV show (complete with music queues) but the closest we get to psychological layers is flashbacks in the shower and his description of being the Hulk like being an acid trip.
Still I note that folks who don’t like action scenes probably don’t like this version and probably would like Ang for whom the action was an utter afterthought.
Comment by Clark — June 14, 2008 @ 8:44 pm
BTW – regarding Stan Lee’s inevitable cameo the best was still Iron Man where he was Hugh Hefner.
Comment by Clark — June 14, 2008 @ 8:45 pm
So I, uh, just saw this movie last night. I liked it a lot. it was well acted and well-paced. Hulk is one of my least favorite superheroes, but I thought they did a good job of telling the story. I particularly thought it was a very smart move to get the Hulk creation story out of the way during the opening credits.
I think the idea of Marvel creating their own universe through interlocking movies with high production standards is pretty great.
There were maybe a half dozen people in the theater when I saw this. Next door at Hancock, there were people lined up to go inside. I guess this is how summer movies work–opening weekend is everything.
Comment by BTD Greg — July 4, 2008 @ 1:45 pm