By CHRISTY LEMIRE, AP Movie Critic
55 minutes ago

The fanboys will probably be happy with the latest incarnation of "The Incredible Hulk." At least we can say that much for it — and that's something we most assuredly could not say about Ang Lee and James Schamus' somber, introspective and largely derided take in 2003 on the beloved Marvel Comics hero.

There's a lot more action this time around as you might expect from "Transporter" director Louis Leterrier — a deafening, endless amount by the colossal conclusion — as well as fond references both to the comic book series and to the television show it inspired starring Bill Bixby. (Leterrier even sneaks in some of Joseph Harnell's "Lonely Man" theme, or as Stewie on "Family Guy" refers to it, "That sad, walking-away song from `The Incredible Hulk.'")

This version is indeed bigger-stronger-faster, which seems appropriate in telling the story of a guy who's been juicing. The effects look way more ... is "realistic" the right word to describe a raging green giant, rampaging down 125th Street in Harlem, flipping cop cars into the air like toys? It's Showtime at the Apollo, all right — unless it's your car.

But the inevitable comparisons to "Iron Man," Marvel Studios' first blockbuster this summer, serve as a glaring reminder of what this "Hulk" lacks: wit and heart. Despite the presence of Edward Norton, an actor capable of going just as deep as Robert Downey Jr., we don't feel a strong sense of Bruce Banner's inner conflict. And that's surprising, given that the famously detail-oriented Norton worked over Zak Penn's script. Instead, he's just a good guy trying to keep the wrong guys from getting their hands on some bad stuff — an oversized cog in the midst of a spectacle.

A lightning-quick title sequence wisely zips through Bruce's back story: As we know by now, Doc Bruce Banner, belted by gamma rays, turns into The Hulk. We don't require further explanation. On the run but still seeking a cure to his radiation poisoning, Bruce lays low in a Brazilian favela, works at a bottling plant and tries to blend in by learning Portuguese from television. He's also taking martial arts classes in hopes of controlling his breathing — and his anger. Clearly, they're not working.

One day, longtime enemy Gen. "Thunderbolt" Ross (William Hurt) tracks him down with a team of soldiers, including the hungry and slightly crazed Emil Blonsky (Tim Roth). The subsequent chase, in and out of cramped alleyways, across rooftops and through hanging laundry, is thrilling. Worthy of a "Bourne" movie, it's probably the film's most compelling sequence, and it didn't even require all that complicated computer-generated imagery. The irony is that the faster he runs, the higher his heart rate climbs and the more likely it becomes that he'll transform into The Hulk.

Ross wants what's inside Bruce's body to replicate it and create a team of super soldiers — and Blonsky is all too happy to volunteer as Test Subject No. 1. Bruce must risk his safety and return to the lab where it all began to stop Ross and Blonsky. This means he also must run into his long-lost love, Dr. Betty Ross, played stiffly by Liv Tyler. Naturally, when they reunite in the pouring rain, she happens to be wearing a flimsy white blouse.

That's a rare delicate element of "The Incredible Hulk," though. From there, it's a series of increasingly bombastic showdowns and explosions leading up to the climactic battle between The Hulk and the 'roided-up beast Blonsky has become, known in the comic book series as The Abomination.

Tim Blake Nelson breaks up the third-act monotony with a hilariously weird performance as Samuel Sterns, the cellular biologist who tries to help Bruce rid his body of gamma rays. But it's the guy who walks through the door at the very end that'll really get the audience excited with the prospect of more superhero sound and fury to come.

"The Incredible Hulk," a Universal Pictures release, is rated PG-13 for sequences of intense action violence, some frightening sci-fi images and brief suggestive content. Running time: 114 minutes. Two and a half stars out of four.

Hmmm. Loved Iron Man. Can't wait for The Dark Knight. Just can't get excited about this one though.

The other Hulk movie wasn't perfect but I kinda like it...and that Hulk looked somewhat more real (not saying "better") than the one I've seen in all these clips. New one looks faker, somehow, which is sad cuz they got the shaggy savage Hulk "look" pretty much right.

Saw it tonight. I enjoyed it, but honestly, the CGI just plain sucked. How many years has it been since Jurassic Park? This is the best they can do? Good thing I'd watch a Hulk movie no matter what.

D'you have to stay til the end of the creidts on this one?

Mike

Nope, no extra scene after the credits. I stayed.

Saw it tonight. I enjoyed it, but honestly, the CGI just plain sucked.I concur. Good story, good pacing, excellent performances throughout, but the CGI is so bad it took me right out of the film. Good video game quality at best. Aside from that, I'd recommend it.

Hope to see it next weekend. I loved the first The Hulk movie and this one seems like it'll be just as interesting as the first. I like that we'll get to see a battle between Hulk and Abomination.

The cgi I've seen so far looked pretty good to me. People keep bashing cgi but it's the only way that a film like this can be made in 2008 unless you want a guy sprayed in green paint or a stiff looking puppet. I also thought that the hulk in Ang Lees film looked better than a lot of people made out too.

There's some bad cgi out there true but a lot of people just seem to attack anything cgi for the sake of it.

Anyhow, a guy called Mathew Bond gave the latest Hulk a bit of a bashing in the Sunday Mail today over here in Britain but sometimes he talks rubbish anyway so I don't always go by reviews.

I want to be clear. I didn't mind the cgi in the 03 Hulk. Jurrasic Park looked OK to me. I don't bash just to hear myself sound superior. I can't recall a film that relies this heavily on CGI characters to be so badly done. It's just bad CGI.

I haven't seen the movie, but, when I see advertisements for the Hulk game and think I am seeing the movie animation, I am inclined to think the CG is pretty bad for a big budget movie.

I want to be clear. I didn't mind the cgi in the 03 Hulk. Jurrasic Park looked OK to me. I don't bash just to hear myself sound superior. I can't recall a film that relies this heavily on CGI characters to be so badly done. It's just bad CGI.




Thing is, I've heard a few people bash the cgi in certain films but when I've watched it, it's been ok. I'm not saying you're bashing it to sound superior but there's definitely a few people who have a holier than though attidude to cgi and they can be quite snobbish about it. I even saw someone the other day saying that Lou Ferrigno should be brought back instead and they were ranting and raving about how bad the cgi in the new Hulk looked. That to me is sheer lunacy, I know.......let's ditch the state of the art effects for a guy covered in green paint and a bad wig.

It's also very difficult to make a big green musclebound guy look convincing. I'm sure that affects people's views on it too.

I haven't seen the movie, but, when I see advertisements for the Hulk game and think I am seeing the movie animation, I am inclined to think the CG is pretty bad for a big budget movie.

My thought too - tho others elsewhere have said the shots seen in the promos do not do justice to what's actually on the screen. Don't really see how that's possible, but you who've seen it can say for sure.

I don't bash just to hear myself sound superior. I can't recall a film that relies this heavily on CGI characters to be so badly done. It's just bad CGI.

Did you see I Am Legend?

Thing is, I've heard a few people bash the cgi in certain films but when I've watched it, it's been ok. I'm not saying you're bashing it to sound superior but there's definitely a few people who have a holier than though attidude to cgi and they can be quite snobbish about it. I even saw someone the other day saying that Lou Ferrigno should be brought back instead and they were ranting and raving about how bad the cgi in the new Hulk looked. That to me is sheer lunacy, I know.......let's ditch the state of the art effects for a guy covered in green paint and a bad wig.

It's also very difficult to make a big green musclebound guy look convincing. I'm sure that affects people's views on it too.

Not to mention Ferrigno is 56 years old.:rolleyes: The thing is, effects aside, how "good" could an Incredible Hulk movie really be? The character is hands down one of Stan Lee's shallowest and least original conceptions - Jekyll & Hyde meets Jack Pierce's Frankenstein by way of Jack Kirby, with a jigger of The Amazing Colossal Man thrown in for good "scientific" measure. The problem for a movie audience is that once Banner becomes The Hulk he's no longer Banner anymore. He's just a green monster smashing things and that's gonna' get old pretty quick. Ang Lee tried to inject too much depth and angst into the character, and it sounds like this movie has gone the opposite route. The only reason the TV series worked was because it was a thinly disguised remake of The Fugitive - one of the best episodic series ever to run on television. Whether it's a guy in green body paint, good CGI, or bad CGI - there's only so much any filmmaker can do with The Hulk. There's just not enough "There" there to begin with.

Not to mention Ferrigno is 56 years old.:rolleyes: The thing is, effects aside, how "good" could an Incredible Hulk movie really be? The character is hands down one of Stan Lee's shallowest and least original conceptions - Jekyll & Hyde meets Jack Pierce's Frankenstein by way of Jack Kirby, with a jigger of The Amazing Colossal Man thrown in for good "scientific" measure. The problem for a movie audience is that once Banner becomes The Hulk he's no longer Banner anymore. He's just a green monster smashing things and that's gonna' get old pretty quick. Ang Lee tried to inject too much depth and angst into the character, and it sounds like this movie has gone the opposite route. The only reason the TV series worked was because it was a thinly disguised remake of The Fugitive - one of the best episodic series ever to run on television. Whether it's a guy in green body paint, good CGI, or bad CGI - there's only so much any filmmaker can do with The Hulk. There's just not enough "There" there to begin with.





Exactly. I think people just expect too much. I love the Hulk and I used to get the comics (still have most of them) but there's only so much you can do with the character. People criticised Lee's Hulk because he tried to inject more depth (though I thought the ending was a bit of a mess) and they criticised the cgi. Now they're criticising the cgi in the new movie and saying it doesn't have enough depth. They just can't win.

As White Goodman says in "Dodgeball": "Touche!".

Did you see I Am Legend?

I saw it this weekend and was pleasantly surprised by how much I liked it. Simple story, true, but it worked.

The CGI looked good to me. At least they got Hulk's proportions right. No short stubby legs this time. The fact that Hulk talks a little (voice by Vince Ferragamo, ironically) brings it closer in line to the comics.

Didn't think I'd buy Norton as Banner, but he pulled it off. Even Liv Tyler did better than I expected. Several inside jokes referring back to the comics and the TV show (which I never really liked) were nice to see. Plus, Stan Lee's cameo was great.

Not to mention working in how Sam Stearns turns into the Leader!

It wasn't Iron Man, but judging it on its own merits, I really liked it.

Hoping to see it this week, and I have only one pre-formed impression - that the new Hulk's head is too small for his body in all the ads I've seen. Is this how he looks in the comics these days? Nossir, don't like it.


The fact that Hulk talks a little

Please, please tell me he doesn't say 'Hulk smash".

Uh...OK, I won't tell you....

...Lou Ferrigno provided the Hulk's voice...and I LIKED IT... :wave:

It was okay, some really good bits and a tighter, more coherent story...but have to admit I enjoyed Lee's HULK more.

And the CGI in the promos DID do it justice, sadly. This Hulk's overall design and detailing was hands down superior, but Lee's actually looked more believably "real," imo. This one seemed over-detailed in some shots...it kept reminding me of the Dante Beast (now I gotta go watch LoEG again).

/Fav part: "Who is 'we'?"

/I can has $7.50 back?

The fact that Hulk talks a little (voice by Vince Ferragamo, ironically) brings it closer in line to the comics.

...Lou Ferrigno provided the Hulk's voice...and I LIKED IT... :wave:


Who is Vince Ferragamo?

- GJS

The guy from wrestling!! :)

Who is Vince Ferragamo?Former NFL quarterback from the late '70s and early '80s. Played for the (Los Angeles) Rams in Super Bowl XIV. Played most of his college ball at Nebraska. Third quarterback in NFL history to throw for over 500 yards in a single game (vs. the Chicago Bears on December 26, 1982). Also played for the Buffalo Bills and the Green Bay Packers in the NFL and for the Montreal Alouettes in the Canadian League for one season.

Now, aren't you sorry you asked? ;)

Qapla'

SSB

Now, aren't you sorry you asked? ;)



Not at all. I'm just embarrased that you guys will realize how "sports challenged" I am.

- GJS

Not at all. I'm just embarrased that you guys will realize how "sports challenged" I am.Well, it isn't as if I remembered that business with the 500+ yard game. I didn't recall that he played for the Bills or in the CFL, either.

Wikipedia, my new favorite time vortex …

Qapla'

SSB

Don't feel bad, Bats...I knew he was a football player but dat's as far as I got with it...

But, in actuality (is that a word?) it's really the guy guy that does the movie voice overs, you know- "In a world where...." , you know, that guy.

Saw it last night. I was predicting a month ago that the movie would be a piece of crap. It most definitely is not. Marvel definitely learned from Ang Lee's mistakes. Yes, the CGI is less than "realistic" - but The Incredible Hulk engages the viewer from the get-go, moves at brisk clip which seldom flags, features solid performances throughout, has a good sense of humor, and manages to make The Hulk into "The Hero" by the time the credits roll.
Sure, the last 20 minutes were basically King Kong meets The WWF Saturday Night Smackdown but whaddaya want from a Hulk movie - deep psychology and oppressive angst? The Incredible Hulk does it's job - and it does it very well.*

* I'm getting a big kick at how Marvel is tying all these movie projects together. The Hulk Super Soldier origin ties in beautifully with Captain America, and anybody notice that S.H.I.E.L.D. now stands for Strategic Homeland Intervention, Enforcement, and Logistics Division.?

I think the thing I do not like about the Hulk's design this go around is he is completely ripped. I always thought of the Hulk as thick and slabby, not a bodybuilder type.

I think the thing I do not like about the Hulk's design this go around is he is completely ripped. I always thought of the Hulk as thick and slabby, not a bodybuilder type.

That's certainly the way Jack Kirby conceived him.

http://img57.imageshack.us/img57/3144/hulk1we2.jpg

And the Ang Lee Hulk followed suit pretty well.

http://ui14.gamespot.com/2221/shhulk_2.jpg

But with this new "Super Soldier" origin/storyline, I suppose the more ripped appearance makes sense.

http://images.hollywood.com/cms/300x375/5210772.jpg

Fun review. :p

http://arts.guardian.co.uk/filmandmusic/story/0,,2284938,00.html

Fun review. :p

http://arts.guardian.co.uk/filmandmusic/story/0,,2284938,00.html

:jest::jest:

Critic remember Ang Lee version. Ang Lee version slagged off. Yet rubbish new Hulk film make that look like Citizen Kane.

Don't know I'd go THAT far...halfway, maybe...

"Critic remember Ang Lee version. Ang Lee version slagged off. Yet rubbish new Hulk film make that look like Citizen Kane."

Which was half the problem with the Ang Lee version. Hulk not lend self to "Art".

Hulk not lend self to "Art".

Yep. Which shows just how lacking the new movie is, when the needlessly artsy Lee flick was generally more engaging than this one (going by input from many adults I know who've seen both).

I miss Bill Bixby.

Yep. Which shows just how lacking the new movie is, when the needlessly artsy Lee flick was generally more engaging than this one (going by input from many adults I know who've seen both).

I miss Bill Bixby.

I was predicting that The Incredible Hulk would be a piece of crap and was pleasantly surprised that (for me) it was not. I absolutely loathed the two FF movies and felt that Daredevil missed the mark by a mile. Bad scripts, bad dialog, bad direction all. I wanted to like the Ang Lee version, and appreciated that he was trying to make a "serious" comic book movie - but you have to know your material. The Hulk does not bear heavy psychology and oppressive angst. He ain't Batman. He ain't Daredevil. I found The Incredible Hulk to be much more engaging than Lee's attempt. Yeah, it's arguably "dumber" - but in this case, IMHO, that was exactly the way to go.

You're right - you can tell they really thought this one through "by the book" (as much as is plausible for a general audience flick). You can tell they were trying to hit all the right notes. Pretty much everything we could ask for in a "true to the comic" Hulk movie IS there.

That's why I'm puzzled that I can't put my finger on exactly why the flick disappointed me, niggling CGI issues aside. I'm also baffled why Lee's, imo, is a slightly more enjoyable film, and I've only seen it twice on DVD, not at the theater. If I see a DVD of Lee's Hulk at Goodwill for two bucks, I'll grab it. But I don't see myself ever desiring to see this one again; I can't even remember that much about it now AND I JUST SAW IT.

If I see a DVD of Lee's Hulk at Goodwill for two bucks, I'll grab it. But I don't see myself ever desiring to see this one again; I can't even remember that much about it now AND I JUST SAW IT.

I'd go along with you there. In fact, I have this odd desire to watch the Ang Lee version again. Not a strong desire, mind you.

I know there are guys here who can do it but don't know if they would: I'd like to see someone take the hair from the new Hulk and stick it on Lee's, using the two pics above. Just curious how it'd come out.