|
|
Post by justanaveragejoe on Sept 25, 2017 15:48:28 GMT
successful?
Hulk has found success in a supporting role in The Avengers, Age of Ultron, and the upcoming Thor: Ragnarok, but he hasn't found much success as the main lead. And with Universal holding the distribution rights to Hulk, it's most likely we're not going to get a Mark Ruffalo Hulk standalone movie. So let's just say Universal gives the distribution rights back to Marvel? Would they try to make a standalone sequel to The Incredible Hulk starring Mark Ruffalo? Could the Hulk finally star in a successful movie?
Hulk 2003 looked like it was going to be another success after the successes of Spider-Man and X-Men, then toxic word of mouth hit, the movie had a humongous second weekend drop. It made $132 million domestic and $245 million worldwide on a $137 million budget.
Universal tries again with The Incredible Hulk. It gets better reception than the previous Hulk, but its box office, while made more than the 2003 Hulk, still the lowest domestic and worldwide gross in the MCU. It made $134 million domestic and $263 million worldwide on a $150 million budget.
What isn't about the Hulk that can't catch a break? Both films fail to reach $150 million domestic and $300 million worldwide. Why aren't his films successful?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2017 16:01:36 GMT
If Universal and Marvel did a deal and used Ruffalo, it would be successful. No doubt about it. If GOTG can be successful, I'm pretty sure Hulk could be.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Sept 25, 2017 16:15:52 GMT
Yea I think it would.
|
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Sept 25, 2017 16:19:43 GMT
HULK made $132 million domestic The Incredible Hulk made $134 million domestic I think the new one would make $133 million domestic |
|
|
|
Post by taylorfirst1 on Sept 25, 2017 18:41:02 GMT
If Universal and Marvel did a deal and used Ruffalo, it would be successful. No doubt about it. If GOTG can be successful, I'm pretty sure Hulk could be. This. |
|
|
|
Post by Spike Del Rey on Sept 25, 2017 19:36:44 GMT
At this point I think it could be. But keep the budget small, and expect a WW of 500-600M, maybe a bit more at this point due to the goodwill Marvel has gained since the early days, and the fact that audiences seem to like Ruffalo quite a bit in the role.
|
|
agentblue
Sophomore
@agentblue
Posts: 792
Likes: 248
 
|
Post by agentblue on Sept 25, 2017 19:58:36 GMT
Yes people will see anything MCU related, UGH I wish Disney would make a deal with Universal and make another film. Oh well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2017 20:21:12 GMT
Hulk was the first superhero for me. He has always been my favourite superhero. So yes, Im hoping for a good new Hulk standalone movie. But I cant see it happening anytime soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Sept 26, 2017 10:53:13 GMT
successful? Hulk has found success in a supporting role in The Avengers, Age of Ultron, and the upcoming Thor: Ragnarok, but he hasn't found much success as the main lead. And with Universal holding the distribution rights to Hulk, it's most likely we're not going to get a Mark Ruffalo Hulk standalone movie. So let's just say Universal gives the distribution rights back to Marvel? Would they try to make a standalone sequel to The Incredible Hulk starring Mark Ruffalo? Could the Hulk finally star in a successful movie? Hulk 2003 looked like it was going to be another success after the successes of Spider-Man and X-Men, then toxic word of mouth hit, the movie had a humongous second weekend drop. It made $132 million domestic and $245 million worldwide on a $137 million budget. Universal tries again with The Incredible Hulk. It gets better reception than the previous Hulk, but its box office, while made more than the 2003 Hulk, still the lowest domestic and worldwide gross in the MCU. It made $134 million domestic and $263 million worldwide on a $150 million budget. What isn't about the Hulk that can't catch a break? Both films fail to reach $150 million domestic and $300 million worldwide. Why aren't his films successful? At this point it would definitely be more financially successful than previous films. I'd be curious what they would want to do though. I don't think they'll do another government chasing him story (although that might be a part of it) but I also don't know if they'd just go straight up monster movie. I really don't know. I actually think they've accepted the idea that hulk works great as part of a whole. |
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Sept 26, 2017 11:11:59 GMT
Yeah it would definitely make a considerable amount of money. The thing is though that the Hulk is a pretty boring and one dimensional character.
So I don't think it would be as successful as most of the others.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2017 13:11:44 GMT
Yeah it would definitely make a considerable amount of money. The thing is though that the Hulk is a pretty boring and one dimensional character. So I don't think it would be as successful as most of the others. When you see the Ragnarok trailer they are changing that a bit. Hulk is given dialogue. So it could be they are trying to give the character more depth. But Hulk has always been about Bruce Banner struggle with his inner beast. Unfortunately the two solo movies did get no further than Hulk running from the millitary and getting angry. There is more they could do with that character. Maybe Hulk should get a more Logan style movie where they explore that struggle a bit more. |
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Sept 26, 2017 15:46:33 GMT
Like all films all it takes is a good writer, the right director and a good cast. If marvel and universal studios work together, I bet the next hulk film will be a big hit. Especially with how popular he is now.
|
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Sept 27, 2017 5:46:42 GMT
successful? Hulk has found success in a supporting role in The Avengers, Age of Ultron, and the upcoming Thor: Ragnarok, but he hasn't found much success as the main lead. And with Universal holding the distribution rights to Hulk, it's most likely we're not going to get a Mark Ruffalo Hulk standalone movie. So let's just say Universal gives the distribution rights back to Marvel? Would they try to make a standalone sequel to The Incredible Hulk starring Mark Ruffalo? Could the Hulk finally star in a successful movie? Hulk 2003 looked like it was going to be another success after the successes of Spider-Man and X-Men, then toxic word of mouth hit, the movie had a humongous second weekend drop. It made $132 million domestic and $245 million worldwide on a $137 million budget. Universal tries again with The Incredible Hulk. It gets better reception than the previous Hulk, but its box office, while made more than the 2003 Hulk, still the lowest domestic and worldwide gross in the MCU. It made $134 million domestic and $263 million worldwide on a $150 million budget. What isn't about the Hulk that can't catch a break? Both films fail to reach $150 million domestic and $300 million worldwide. Why aren't his films successful? I think the problem is they don't make Hulk movies. They make Bruce Banner movies. ...And he is an extremely boring character to base a movie on. Ever notice that most people refer to the Hulk movies like you did? "A Mark Ruffalo Hulk" "An Edward Norton Hulk" "An Eric Bana Hulk". There is a character who looks like the Hulk and makes very brief appearances in those Banner movies but he's not the Hulk. He can't even talk. (this may be changing with Thor 3 hopefully) But then they've got to quickly get back to Banner and his angst. That dominates the narrative of the movie. That's fine for a small budget drama...but that's not very entertaining for a big audience. One problem with making a real Hulk movie is the ego of the male lead. They aren't going to like being a supporting character like Banner is in the comics. So they have to be the "star" of the movie so they can emote the tragic plight of Banner and show off those acting chops. It's a unique situation among comic characters. All the other ones are played by the actor. The Hulk is the only character where the actor is playing a boring character that must be thrust into the lead role. |
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Sept 27, 2017 10:57:31 GMT
If Universal and Marvel did a deal and used Ruffalo, it would be successful. No doubt about it. If GOTG can be successful, I'm pretty sure Hulk could be. This. Actually I think both of you might be thinking Hulk being more well known means his film has to be able to be successful compared to something like Guardians and I honestly just don't think that's true. The Guardians have things going for them that Hulk just doesn't. They have the ability for a team atmosphere, for natural comedy, for a wider array of action styles, for a wider array of villains even. Hulk is much more in a box in terms of what they can do with his story and character, and not that I'm saying it's impossible for him to be just as successful, but that the Guardians being successful does not translate to Hulk. |
|
|
|
Post by sandwichclegane on Sept 27, 2017 15:09:52 GMT
If Universal and Marvel did a deal and used Ruffalo, it would be successful. No doubt about it. If GOTG can be successful, I'm pretty sure Hulk could be. yeah man, It has to be Ruffalo, he is perfect for mild mannered Banner. |
|
