To much introspective whining; not enough smashing.
"War without fire is like sausages without mustard." - Jean Juvénal des Ursins
Nick Nolte being the main villain somehow and for some reason.
We already had a thread for this.
Mad Scientist Wannabe
No weight on the Hulk.
Of course, don't you know anything about ALCHEMY?!- Twin clones of Ivan the Great
The CGI, the annoying split screen, Bruce being a Navel-gazing weenie.
edited 25th Jan '13 10:11:58 PM by Lionheart0
It was boring.
I liked Ang Lee's version so much I finished watching it. Which is more than I did with both subsequent remakes. So, not boring.
Happy New Year!
Basically the whole thing about Bruce's sucky father. It's has no place in hulk mythus and detracts from purity of the original narrative of Hulk Smash.
hashtagsarestupid
Didn't Bruce having an abusive father come from the comics?
Bruce having an abusive father who killed his mom IS from the comics. The problem with the movie was more that Ang Lee tried way too hard to make it artsy and introspective. Like I think Ed Norton put it great when he was talking about the reboot, when he said you could really tell that Lee and the crew were embarrassed to be working on a comic book movie.
Embarrassed? How and why?
The Final ECW Champion
I thought the 2003 Hulk had the best smashing. Just fast forward to the parts where Bruce Hulk's out and you will be fine. Also...
Honestly, I think the Ang Lee Hulk was *better* than TIH. It just had poor pacing, and a badly anticlimactic ending. If the front end of the movie were tightened up a bit, and the entire fight with his dad cut out and replaced by a "Ross takes Banner back to gamma base, where he can safely research his own cure under Ross' protection now that Idiot!Dude's plans proved catastrophic", it would have been a ton more successful.
TIH. . . gets far, far too much credit for the Hulk/Abomination fight at the end.
Home of CBR Rumbles-in-Exile: rumbles.fr.yuku.com
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
His assertion was that Lee and the writers tried to make the movie seem all artsy and deep because they were embarrassed to actually be doing a superhero film.
Given some of the stuff in the movie, he may have been trying to be "artsy", but I don't think it was out of embarassment. If anything, it was TIH that tried more vigorously to be gritty and realistic.
It was largely the pacing and some of the cinematic choices rubbed fans the wrong way such as the "avocado skin" and the increasing size the madder he gets. For me the supposed "weightless" argument is the least of those issues because proper physics with something like a Hulk jump is almost impossible to replicate, The Avengers Hulk is almost equally "weightless" but since he was flying between buildings and smashing aliens it's more distracting.
To be fair, I like Hulk 2003 and TIH just about the same. Hulk 2003 just had a bad way of setting the origin up. Of course, that is a major problem when you are doing an origin movie, but the parts that didn't deal with tinkering with Hulk's perfectly serviceable core origin adding all sorts of awkward details worked out fine.
Happy New Year!
While it's true that Bruce's dad was an asshole in the comics it was only ever used to explain the hulk's rage. not his mutant power to break things. Comic hulk was a creation of bad luck and Bruce Banner's own scientific arrogance and didn't had the unecessary baggage of Bruce's 'genetic legacy'.
edited 26th Jan '13 3:41:53 PM by joeyjojo
hashtagsarestupid
Actual Wrestling Legend
Well, interviews with the director seem pretty cut and dry.
Ang Lee hates being known only for Sense & Sensibility. He chose the most American property he could get his hands on. But Lee still doesn't grasp American action beats or humor, so he decided to make it a character piece about his own stained relationship with his stereotypical strict Asian father. I'd guess the film resonates better in the far east where parents and kids don't communicate at all.
The other problems were an outgrowth of pairing the wrong director with the project. There was no focus or creative vision, just a mish-mash of cliches as window dressing.
edited 26th Jan '13 2:57:38 PM by johnnyfog
I'm a skeptical squirrel
Brony? Moi? surely you jest!
It was a good movie, just not a good superhero movie.
He who fights bronies should see to itthat he himself does not become a brony. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, Pinkie Pie gazes Also
My problem with the film was how miserable it was. It seemed to focus mostly on Banner's dad being an absolute raging asshole, and how much trauma he inflicted and would continue to inflict upon Banner. I know a comic book movie can be dark but entertaining, but it just didn't work with this Hulk movie.
I liked it better when Questionable Casting was called WTH Casting Agency
Well, to be fair, Hulk is one of the most emotionally miserable and unhappy concepts for a superhero. The darkness didn't bother me, but how contrived such darkness was here.
I can understand an appreciate what Ang Lee was trying to do, I just think he executed it very poorly. After all, The Dark Knight Trilogy has proven that a Super Hero movie actually CAN be made more dramatic. However, the trilogy was still an action movie at the core.
Lee, however, practically turned Hulk into a soap opera with a few action scenes, and gave Bruce way too much Wangst. A lot of the conversational scenes just didn't seem to add much to the story and seemed more like padding. Not to mention that the origin story seemed too contrived, like they were trying too hard to be scientific. (Bruce receives his Dad's genetic engineering, then goes into the EXACT SAME field his real Dad who he never knew was in, and has a Freak Lab Accident where he gets injected with nanotech AND zapped with radiation.) And having a character who existed to be nothing more than a Jerkass and plot device was kind of stupid.
Also, I understand Lee was using the split-screen to replicate a comic-like feel, but instead it ended up being rather distracting. The Warriors is a much better example of how to do this correctly. The psychedelic background images were also distracting.
Its also interesting to note the triggers for the Hulk-out. Lee had it as emotional trauma, while the Marvel Cinematic Universe put more emphasis on physical trauma. I also found Norton's and Ruffalo's interpretations of the character to be much more interesting.
All that said, I don't consider The Incredible Hulk to be the better movie. I consider it to be the more ENJOYABLE movie. What it all really comes down to is that when people go to see the Hulk, they want to see the Hulk Smash, not Bruce Banner Wangst.
edited 28th Jan '13 8:55:22 AM by shiro_okami
I heard that the 2003 movie version of Hulk was criticized for being very dramatic and sort of overshadowing the green guy himself. I heard there was a side story of Banner having an abusive father. Also, The Nostalgia Critic made fun of Ang Lee in his Jack Frost review during a dramatic padding scene.
What do you think was wrong with it?
edited 25th Jan '13 4:57:26 PM by Disney23