What did you think of "The Hulk" Movie?

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Hello,



I thought the movie was utter crap. The worst summer blockbuster flop since Godzilla. I don't want to ruin it for the folks who still want to see. I am curious of your impressions though??



Thanks
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 34
    pscatespscates Posts: 5,847member
    Something about it simply looks "lacking". Well, not Ms. Connelly, but that's a whole other thread.







    But I don't know. I never got into the Hulk. Not really a "superhero" in the Superman/Batman/Spiderman mold. Just some geek who turns green when he's pissed off.



    Oooo...awesome!







    And in all the clips I've seen of it, the CGI stuff looks absolutely horrible and fake and not convincing AT ALL. The first "Jurassic Park", from 10 years ago, holds up better than what I've from this Hulk movie so far.



    I won't be seeing it. I've heard nothing but lukewarm to negative reviews of it. That, combined with my stellar, 100% accurate "first impression is always dead-on" assessment of all that is pop culture and entertainment, means I'll be skipping this one, fellas.



  • Reply 2 of 34
    murbotmurbot Posts: 5,262member
    I'm going to it tonight.



    ROWR.
  • Reply 3 of 34
    jonathanjonathan Posts: 312member
    I hear it's 2 and a half hours, with maybe 1/5 of that being 'Hulk Kicking Ass' time.



    Angst ain't my thing, Ang. Although the whole 'Hulk' premise seems lacking in comparison to say, Spiderman or the X-Men...
  • Reply 4 of 34
    rokrok Posts: 3,519member
    well, it's only gotten GOOD reviews here north of the border, including the local indy newspaper Now Toronto, which NEVER gives higher than 3 stars (er, N's) for comic-related movies, but they gave Hulk 4. toronto star also gave it 4 stars. chud.com also gave it high marks.



    look, i'm not sure what to expect, but i have a really hard time believing that it's utter crap. not with the cast and director. but if it's only about 1/4 HULK SMASH!!!, then maybe you missed out on plot development, too. maybe ang and company use special effects to add to, not replace, the story. the CGI on the Hulk himself seeems a bit off to me, too, but i can't quite describe it. it's like there isn't enough detail anywhere but the facial expressions on his body. the muscles seems very flat to what i would expect to see on a 500-700 lb. muscled-up monster (see the trailer for LXG, and mr. hyde's "body" for the details i was expecting. plus, the garish green they chose for the skin (and those purple, untearable capri pants he likes to wear) are true to the comic, but seem to stick out too much against the realistic background they were trying to set it against. but again, all of this is based off the trailers i have seen - nothing more.



    mind you, i have not seen it yet, so maybe i'll change my mind after the fact and hate it. stranger things have happened. but i am keeping an open mind as much as possible, and also trying to divorce this movie from the great 80's tv show with bixby and ferrigno, which was only loosely based on the comic. i think a lot of people wanted an updated version of that series for this movie, since most people were watching the show in the pop culture atmosphere, as opposed to reading the comic.
  • Reply 5 of 34
    murbotmurbot Posts: 5,262member
    Saw it last night, and thought it was good. The CGI on Hulk seems much better in a theater than it did in the trailers. There are scenes where he's straining and there is insane muscle detail - major striations in his pecs when he's yelling in rage, or tearing the top off of a tank.



    I think the crowd I was in all thoroughly enjoyed it. There are several scenes that are just so cool that lots of people were yelling and cheering. The scene where he fights the dogs is AWESOME. Funny, since that got about 5 seconds worth of trailer time. There were a few times during that battle that everyone in the theater went "Whoa!!!" I won't give any details, but if you hear dogs growling, do NOT go to the can.



    A thumbs up, for sure. Eric Bana is a great actor, and damn, it's nice seeing Jennifer Connelly for so long. She's looking pretty sweet these days.



    Of course I may be biased... and I don't want to make him angry. He is watching me type this, after all.







  • Reply 6 of 34
    pscatespscates Posts: 5,847member
    Yes...WHAT is the deal on those pants? They don't come off. And they're purple. Who, besides Prince would wear purple pants? Why do his shirt and shoes go away, but yet his pants stay on? Stretch denim? Elasti-belt waistband?



    That, along with "where is Superman's cape when he's dressed as Clark Kent" are the two big comic book questions that have haunted me for at least 29 years.



  • Reply 7 of 34
    dave k.dave k. Posts: 1,306member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by murbot

    Saw it last night, and thought it was good. The CGI on Hulk seems much better in a theater than it did in the trailers. There are scenes where he's straining and there is insane muscle detail - major striations in his pecs when he's yelling in rage, or tearing the top off of a tank.



    I think the crowd I was in all thoroughly enjoyed it. There are several scenes that are just so cool that lots of people were yelling and cheering. The scene where he fights the dogs is AWESOME. Funny, since that got about 5 seconds worth of trailer time. There were a few times during that battle that everyone in the theater went "Whoa!!!" I won't give any details, but if you hear dogs growling, do NOT go to the can.



    A thumbs up, for sure. Eric Bana is a great actor, and damn, it's nice seeing Jennifer Connelly for so long. She's looking pretty sweet these days.



    Of course I may be biased... and I don't want to make him angry. He is watching me type this, after all.











    I am glad you enjoyed it. I was very very disappointed with the story. I am a big comic fan and I don't know why they deviated so much from the comic. I thought, while the CGI Hulk was rendered well, there was too much of himing jumping around.



    I will agree with you regarding Eric Bana. I didn't think his character was as smart as he should have been, but Eric did play the part well.



    Thanks for feedback.
  • Reply 8 of 34
    dave k.dave k. Posts: 1,306member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by pscates

    Yes...WHAT is the deal on those pants? They don't come off. And they're purple. Who, besides Prince would wear purple pants? Why do his shirt and shoes go away, but yet his pants stay on? Stretch denim? Elasti-belt waistband?



    That, along with "where is Superman's cape when he's dressed as Clark Kent" are the two big comic book questions that have haunted me for at least 29 years.







    Bruce Banner is 6' tall and about 1.5' wide. The Hulk is about 15' tall and wider than a car. All clothing is ripped apart, except for those pants. Go figure. What an amazing fabric those pants must be. I could use a pair of those for Thanksgiving.
  • Reply 9 of 34
    murbotmurbot Posts: 5,262member
    I was going to pay more attention to the pants thing, but forgot. He did end up nude after the dog scene though, and that was a really dark scene. I guess to mask his Hulk Penis from scaring kids and making the men in the audience feel inadequate. He gets larger as he gets more enraged, so he obviously got big enough to rip the pants off completely.



    The other scene I remember was in the city near the end when they show him changing back from the Hulk to normal, without taking the camera of him. Looked pretty cool. I noticed the pants go from really tight to fairly loose on him. Would have been a good product placement for Haggar to get their name on his belt there or something.



    One negative - I know they were going for a comic book feel to the story, but at times the little comic panes thing got very annoying. Like one thing is happening, and you're looking at 4-5 rectangular boxes from different views, etc. It fit perfectly in some scenes, and in others it just felt like they said "well, Ang wants some more of the comic book boxes in here... where should we cram them in?" It's not REALLY often that they do this, but often enough to get annoying (to me, at least).
  • Reply 10 of 34
    pscatespscates Posts: 5,847member
    USA Today's review also dinged the split-screen/comic panel usage. Said it was distracting and gratuitous at times.



    Unless they were all filled with Ms. Connelly stepping out of the shower or whatever. Then I can think of no better technique for a filmmaker to employ.
  • Reply 11 of 34
    der kopfder kopf Posts: 2,275member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by murbot

    I guess to mask his Hulk Penis from scaring kids and making the men in the audience feel inadequate.



    Well, I can tell you that that's why I keep my pants on most of the time.
  • Reply 12 of 34
    pfflampfflam Posts: 5,053member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by pscates

    Yes...WHAT is the deal on those pants? They don't come off. And they're purple. Who, besides Prince would wear purple pants?



    Now clearlly they are not purple . . . they are Aubergine!!!!!

    more commonly called "eggplant"



    and I have a nice pair of Aubergine slacks . . . very classy

  • Reply 13 of 34
    mrmistermrmister Posts: 1,095member
    I liked it, overall. Seems a lot didn't, but for me, it worked.



    And the Hulk pants are magic--if you don't suspend belief for that you get all kinds of problems, like a naked Hulk with a Hulk-sized penis.
  • Reply 14 of 34
    fran441fran441 Posts: 3,715member
    My eyes! It burns! It burns!



    Waste of my time and money. 1 hour and 45 minutes of background information makes for a bad movie. Terrible camera angles seals the deal.
  • Reply 15 of 34
    argentoargento Posts: 483member
    I bet he has a HUGE cock.
  • Reply 16 of 34
    dave k.dave k. Posts: 1,306member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Fran441

    My eyes! It burns! It burns!



    Waste of my time and money. 1 hour and 45 minutes of background information makes for a bad movie. Terrible camera angles seals the deal.




    I am glad I wasn't the only one.
  • Reply 17 of 34
    thttht Posts: 3,209member
    I thought it was very good up until the ending. Terrible climax.
  • Reply 18 of 34
    mgossettmgossett Posts: 85member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by THT

    I thought it was very good up until the ending. Terrible climax.



    Exactly! They should have just ended it at the "end" without all that Amazon crap.



    -Mike
  • Reply 19 of 34
    pscatespscates Posts: 5,847member
    What's gotten into Marvel? They're releasing a gazillion movies featuring their characters, aren't they?



    Spiderman, Hulk and Daredevil. I THINK X-Men are too (don't yell at me too much if I'm wrong). What about that new Punisher trailer? Is he a Marvel guy too? If so, that's five in just about a year or so.



    Just seems all at once.



    I wish DC would do the same: a GOOD Batman and a modern, smart reworking of Superman (with all that today's CGI has to offer) could be very entertaining to see.
  • Reply 20 of 34
    eds66eds66 Posts: 119member
    I loved it.
Sign In or Register to comment.