The Incredible Hulk and Broad Strokes

Okay, since it is turning into an edit war, I'm bringing it here for discussion. I contend that The Incredible Hulk is being inappropriately placed under Broad Strokes. Broad Strokes applies when two works are intended to have a canon relationship, but that canonicity is treated loosely. Minor details are changed or glossed over.

The relationship between Hulk and The Incredible Hulk goes well beyond overlooking minor details and changes between the two, in numerous ways:

1. The accident that creates the Hulk is shown in both versions, and is almost completely different. In the reboot, it is a deliberate medical experiment gone wrong, as opposed to a lab accident. In the reboot, General Ross is directly involved, unlike in the Ang Lee version. In the reboot, Banner immediately becomes the Hulk on site and trashes the place, unlike the Ang Lee version.

2. General Ross' entire characterization and relationship to Banner and Betsy is different. In the Ang Lee version, he is sympathetic to Banner and doing his best to help Banner while also containing the Hulk; in the reboot, he is ruthlessly trying to acquire the secret of the Hulk to make super soldiers. In the Ang Lee version, he has no ties whatsoever to any kind of super soldier program, unlike the reboot. What's more, the reboot makes it clear that he was *always* like this, instead of simply being a man who got worse as he hunted the Hulk. . . which in the Ang Lee version, he wasn't doing at the end of the movie anyway.

3. David Banner was an integral part of the Ang Lee version, being the main villain of the story, with important relations to both Banner and Ross. There is not even the slightest hint of his having ever existed in the reboot. . . which is all the weirder, seeing as it means just overlooking the existence of an *entire superpowered battle that ended in the usage of a nuclear weapon*. The reboot intro sequence does not even suggest anything like this ever happened.

4. The reboot intro sequence does, however, strongly indicate that Banner was on the run the entire time since becoming the Hulk. No references to being captured and held at gamma base like in the Ang Lee version. For that matter, no references to the Hulk ever getting into an extended battle with the Army leading into a major city; Ross's reference to past encounters with the Hulk describes the casualties of said encounters, and specifically does not include any mention of a 'Hulk vs the Army' battle. The intro does mention "urban legend" level rumors about the Hulk's existence, but nothing about being seen rampaging in a major city.

5. And last, but certainly not least, Marvel Studios itself *says* the movie is a reboot. Not a sequel, not a loose sequel, but a reboot. Seeing as their word is what is ultimately so regarding canon. . .

The only suggestions that it is a sequel, Broad Strokes or not, come from early production stages when the movie was intended to be a sequel. It is true, the movie was at one point intended to be a sequel, and probably a sequel with enough minor variances to qualify as Broad Strokes. However, by the time it was actually finished, those variances became vastly more extreme. If the producers tried to declare that the finished product *was* a direct sequel, other tropes than Broad Strokes would be applicable. Most likely rather harsh ones from the Darth Wiki.

As near as I can reckon, there are only limited commonalities between the two movies: the existence of the characters Banner, Ross, and Betsy; a science accident producing the Hulk; attempts to find a cure; the military as an antagonist. I contend these are not sufficient to qualify as Broad Strokes. For one, these elements are found in almost every version of the Hulk that exists; for these elements alone to qualify for Broad Strokes would mean that the movie is a Broad Strokes sequel to the TV show, various comics, and the cartoon. Second, except for the names of specific characters, these elements are found in manner other non-Hulk movies involving science accidents and horrible monsters.

Thoughts?

You're right. All I have to say.

Not contending anything in your post but doesn't the second film start where the first ended with Bruce living in some South American country?

If so, that might be the reason the edit war you're talking about is going on?

Its true, and likely true. Its also irrelevant, given the many and obvious differences from the earlier movie. Basically, its an artifact from earlier in production when the movie was intended as an actual sequel.

I dunno, that was pretty much one of the only things I remembered from either movie. I'd figure whoever you're having this edit war with is having the same problem?

EDIT: Looking at the edits, that does seem to be the other person's problem.

edited 6th Aug '11 4:34:53 PM by NULLcHiLD27

Which is why I brought it up here, along with my full argument for why the trope doesn't apply.

Since I am apparently the other side of the edit war I might as well give my reasons.

When they got ready to make the 2008 movie they said expressly that they couldn't just ignore the fact the 2003 movie existed, and so crafted the new movie to tell a story after that time period. They did not fully reboot the series by retelling the origin story because regardless of the difference in details it would be treading the same ground of the 2003 film.

Broad Strokes is "details are different but the story still took place." It is similar to the '92 Buffy The Vampire Slayer movie being treated as semi-canon for the '97 series, it is acknowledging that the story you saw previously did take place in some fashion. In both cases they begin the story In Medias Res, accepting that something happened before the new adventure is taking place. Broad Strokes is not "The previous movie you saw is canon whether you like it or not" and neither is it "We liked the previous movie" as that was certainly not the case with BTVS.

There is enough similarity to the 2003 movie, especially the run to South America and taking place five years later, that Broad Strokes is clearly their intention. If they wanted to fully reboot the series they would have retold the origin or completely change Bruce's situation at the beginning (such as it being 7 years ago or Bruce was living in the Phillipines). The movie even takes strides to establish the new details (the exact nature of Ross's involvement and Banners' Freak Lab Accident) through dialogue, which is sort of acknowledging "We are changing elements of the 03 movie without actually retelling it."

You can look at it this way, that regardless of critical reception of the '03 film or what details are different in the '08 film the movie is saying that there was an earlier story that took place 5 years prior. That is what Broad Strokes is about. If we argue about what constitutes minor or major details that would turn the trope subjective.

edited 6th Aug '11 10:53:23 PM by KJMackley

For what it's worth, that's how I've always seen it.

It's a resquel.