|
Post by dazz on Sept 9, 2019 22:03:38 GMT
Fair enough, I do think Ang Lee's was shooting for more than TIH was, and for some they would rather have a failure to be spectacular rather than succeeding to be passable, I would rather see something done well if not all that inspired than the other way around though, a fail whilst trying to be spectacular is still a fail and it stinks as bad as any other pile of crap.
I hadn't actually thought about the TV show similarity for TIH, that's a fair point but I don't think a fair criticism, you know these characters and stories are revamped and retold over and over again, the TV show version is as much a Hulk iteration as any other, and probably the most famous prior to the films so it makes sense I guess they would do that.
Like I said though I agree Ang Lee's tried to do more than TIH did but for me pretty much everything about that movie failed to make an impression, outside of Hulk dogs I don't really recall the movie much like I recall vague bits and pieces but that's it, I can however recall most of TIH, but that's me, I wont begrudge anyone for liking the 2003 version, afterall I like Howard The Duck and I don't care what anyone else thinks about that movie
And that is fair enough as well. I experience the opposite effect from you when considering Hulk and TiH. TiH barely registers for me in terms of memorable performances or moments. William Hurt, a fantastic actor in his own right, is - by far -no Sam Elliot. Liv Tyler's doe-eyed vacancy doesn't match Jennifer Connelley's searching intensity and quiet pensiveness. Eric Bana, while not perfect, conveys a man who is trying to understand and cope with a bizarre disability. Norton is so busy remembering to breathe and looking at his G-Shock wristwatch that he forgot to turn in a performance. I cringe every time I think of him lifting his head and smiling into the camera with CG-ed electric green eyes --- while meditating. TiH fails in my mind because it was a reaction to Hulk. The fans said, "we don't like the chubby Hulk character design." ILM responded with a design that is negative 30% body fat. Fans said, "we want more smashing and more destruction." TiH was promptly scripted to have the Hulk level an entire city block. Fanboys said, "we don't want any psychobabble or internal reflection from the character." TiH dutifully features none of that. There's nothing wrong with giving fans what they want but, I think TiH should have tried a little harder to be more creative and less generic. I prefer a film to take significant risks and fail rather than deliver on precisely what I requested. A lot of people claim to feel the same way, but when push comes to shove, they'd prefer a safe success like TiH (as is the majority feeling in this thread). And, people say as much with their wallets on opening night (which is why the MCU proceeds as it does). I think Norton was so enamored of Bill Bixby's thoughtful and "level" take on "David Banner" that he forgot to open up a Hulk comic book and read it. My guess is he likely considered the TV show superior to the comic book material. I think it's less a reaction to Hulk in some parts and more just Norton's muscle flexing, he did like a full rewrite of the script of something because Marvel foolishly gave him that power to get him to star in the movie, but him maybe being enamored with Bixby's take is right, or he just didn't care about the comics in general or the character, this was before the boom of the cbm's when only Spidey was really making significant waves as a property, a lot of people also were kind of like eh comics at the time, that's all different now thankfully in a lot of situations.
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Sept 9, 2019 22:24:25 GMT
Is this a new member or another sock puppet? Specifically? No idea. But it's obviously a part of the Colden, Raptor, Akbars masturbation circle. Fuck you.
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Sept 9, 2019 22:57:30 GMT
Specifically? No idea. But it's obviously a part of the Colden, Raptor, Akbars masturbation circle. Fuck you.
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Sept 9, 2019 23:29:40 GMT
Hulk 2003 isn't a perfect movie, but it's far better than the Incredible Hulk IMO. TiH is more or less Hulk for Dummies.Ang Lee's Hulk hews more closely to the comic book mythology. Hulk doesn't have a gamma bomb but, the creature is drawn to the site of his creation in the desert. The compulsion to return to his "birthplace" shows his tragic and solitary. The Hulk, more than anything, wants to be left alone. Who knows what TiH's roided up monstrosity wants. No one ever calls out the opening scene where a mild-mannered scientist suddenly becomes a parkour master and evades a spec-ops team. I'd rather watch a good fluff action flick that a failed art-house movie or drama to be perfectly honest.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Sept 9, 2019 23:31:53 GMT
Hulk 2003 isn't a perfect movie, but it's far better than the Incredible Hulk IMO. TiH is more or less Hulk for Dummies.Ang Lee's Hulk hews more closely to the comic book mythology. Hulk doesn't have a gamma bomb but, the creature is drawn to the site of his creation in the desert. The compulsion to return to his "birthplace" shows his tragic and solitary. The Hulk, more than anything, wants to be left alone. Who knows what TiH's roided up monstrosity wants. No one ever calls out the opening scene where a mild-mannered scientist suddenly becomes a parkour master and evades a spec-ops team. I'd rather watch a good fluff action flick that a failed art-house movie or drama to be perfectly honest. I'm in the opposite camp but, no worries, it takes all kinds.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Sept 9, 2019 23:41:24 GMT
And that is fair enough as well. I experience the opposite effect from you when considering Hulk and TiH. TiH barely registers for me in terms of memorable performances or moments. William Hurt, a fantastic actor in his own right, is - by far -no Sam Elliot. Liv Tyler's doe-eyed vacancy doesn't match Jennifer Connelley's searching intensity and quiet pensiveness. Eric Bana, while not perfect, conveys a man who is trying to understand and cope with a bizarre disability. Norton is so busy remembering to breathe and looking at his G-Shock wristwatch that he forgot to turn in a performance. I cringe every time I think of him lifting his head and smiling into the camera with CG-ed electric green eyes --- while meditating. TiH fails in my mind because it was a reaction to Hulk. The fans said, "we don't like the chubby Hulk character design." ILM responded with a design that is negative 30% body fat. Fans said, "we want more smashing and more destruction." TiH was promptly scripted to have the Hulk level an entire city block. Fanboys said, "we don't want any psychobabble or internal reflection from the character." TiH dutifully features none of that. There's nothing wrong with giving fans what they want but, I think TiH should have tried a little harder to be more creative and less generic. I prefer a film to take significant risks and fail rather than deliver on precisely what I requested. A lot of people claim to feel the same way, but when push comes to shove, they'd prefer a safe success like TiH (as is the majority feeling in this thread). And, people say as much with their wallets on opening night (which is why the MCU proceeds as it does). I think Norton was so enamored of Bill Bixby's thoughtful and "level" take on "David Banner" that he forgot to open up a Hulk comic book and read it. My guess is he likely considered the TV show superior to the comic book material. I think it's less a reaction to Hulk in some parts and more just Norton's muscle flexing, he did like a full rewrite of the script of something because Marvel foolishly gave him that power to get him to star in the movie, but him maybe being enamored with Bixby's take is right, or he just didn't care about the comics in general or the character, this was before the boom of the cbm's when only Spidey was really making significant waves as a property, a lot of people also were kind of like eh comics at the time, that's all different now thankfully in a lot of situations.
We are agreed, to some extent. Norton leans into the "man on the run in search of a cure" angle that the TV show recycled for years. Hulk wants to be a high-minded origin story that focuses on Banner's trauma and repression - a lot of it is overwrought, but it still works for me nonetheless. Hulk and TiH are excellent barometers for discerning the two basic types of comic-book enthusiasts; those who are in it for the action and violence and those who enjoy character and story. I don't judge either way but, if I run into a hardcore TiH fan, I generally know what they are all about and how best to communicate with them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2019 2:52:03 GMT
Is this a new member or another sock puppet? Specifically? No idea. But it's obviously a part of the Colden, Raptor, Akbars masturbation circle. Obviously.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2019 4:20:12 GMT
No it was just a really boring and crappy movie. It always has been. I don't think a dumb Dragon Ball Z fanboy has any place to talk to me about what is and isn't "boring" and "crappy." The hulk-sized chip on your shoulder about this movie is showing
|
|
|
Post by taylorfirst1 on Sept 10, 2019 14:37:18 GMT
I think it's less a reaction to Hulk in some parts and more just Norton's muscle flexing, he did like a full rewrite of the script of something because Marvel foolishly gave him that power to get him to star in the movie, but him maybe being enamored with Bixby's take is right, or he just didn't care about the comics in general or the character, this was before the boom of the cbm's when only Spidey was really making significant waves as a property, a lot of people also were kind of like eh comics at the time, that's all different now thankfully in a lot of situations.
We are agreed, to some extent. Norton leans into the "man on the run in search of a cure" angle that the TV show recycled for years. Hulk wants to be a high-minded origin story that focuses on Banner's trauma and repression - a lot of it is overwrought, but it still works for me nonetheless. Hulk and TiH are excellent barometers for discerning the two basic types of comic-book enthusiasts; those who are in it for the action and violence and those who enjoy character and story. I don't judge either way but, if I run into a hardcore TiH fan, I generally know what they are all about and how best to communicate with them. If I'm in the mood for character and story, I'll read a real book as opposed to a comic strip book.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Sept 10, 2019 15:02:44 GMT
We are agreed, to some extent. Norton leans into the "man on the run in search of a cure" angle that the TV show recycled for years. Hulk wants to be a high-minded origin story that focuses on Banner's trauma and repression - a lot of it is overwrought, but it still works for me nonetheless. Hulk and TiH are excellent barometers for discerning the two basic types of comic-book enthusiasts; those who are in it for the action and violence and those who enjoy character and story. I don't judge either way but, if I run into a hardcore TiH fan, I generally know what they are all about and how best to communicate with them. If I'm in the mood for character and story, I'll read a real book as opposed to a comic strip book. And that's cool. Since the modern era began, comic book literature has evolved to the point where the characters and stories are just as sophisticated as those presented in any good novel. I respond to both action and drama, but the latter is far more important to me. Good storytelling is wherever you find it. I will say this for TiH, Tim Roth's Blonsky is a highlight for me in the film. His aging soldier who is looking for an edge gives him some credibility (and a sorely needed reason to be in the movie other than must shoot, kick, and punch).
|
|
|
Post by taylorfirst1 on Sept 10, 2019 15:12:03 GMT
Lord Death ManI agree about Blonsky. I think he is actually one of the MCUs best villains.
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Sept 10, 2019 19:46:06 GMT
I'd rather watch a good fluff action flick that a failed art-house movie or drama to be perfectly honest. I'm in the opposite camp but, no worries, it takes all kinds. You would pick BAD drama over a good action flick?
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Sept 10, 2019 19:47:11 GMT
Lord Death Man I agree about Blonsky. I think he is actually one of the MCUs best villains. I think he's a good villain, it's just a shame the end of end of The Incredible Hulk looked like a PS2 game.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Sept 10, 2019 19:55:00 GMT
I'm in the opposite camp but, no worries, it takes all kinds. You would pick BAD drama over a good action flick? Not necessarily. It's more accurate to say that I would choose a challenging drama that misses the mark over a generic action film. I didn't think TiH was "good."
|
|