Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on Wanna See Some Hot, Sweaty Hulk on Abomination Action?


It probably won't be as bad as the Eric Bana Hulk, just because it's Edward Norton. But... it's still probably going to be terrible.

Posted by Aislinn | May 23, 2008 5:29 PM

Muscle Marys.

Posted by DJSauvage | May 23, 2008 5:52 PM

You know what? Screw you guys. Ang Lee's Hulk was a bold reimagining of the Hulk mythos. Its lack of critical accolades is just further evidence that the American media is composed of philistines and smug amateurs.

That's my thesis, and I'll take all comers.

Posted by Judah | May 23, 2008 6:25 PM

there has yet to be a comic book movie that doesn't SUCK GIANT FUCKING BALLS. how anyone can be entertained by movies with no discernable plot that consist of men prancing around in leotards, shit blowing up, and a conclusion that can be predicted before the movie even starts is beyond my comprehension.

Posted by brandon | May 23, 2008 7:01 PM

Wow, Brandon, I think you may have taught my High School freshman English class.

Posted by flamingbanjo | May 23, 2008 7:29 PM

X-Men, X-Men 2, Spiderman, Spiderman 2, Iron Man and Batman Begins have all been pretty good to great.

"Hulk" was disappointing story and character-wise but I loved Ang Lee's direction. Sin City et al might try to replicate the comic book look, but Hulk is pretty much the only one that *flows* like a comic book.

After Iron Man, I am pretty excited at the prospect of a series of films building up to the Avengers, especially since they're going to have Samuel L Jackson as (Ultimate) Nick Fury.

Posted by lol | May 23, 2008 7:44 PM

Judah@3, I'm a fan of Ang Lee and Eric Bana, and that film was like watching paint dry. Nick Nolte was predictably good as a walking id, but otherwise:

(1) pacing was slow as shit.
(2) Bana dialog with Connelly was boring and sophomoric.
(3) Bana dialog with Sam Elliott was ESPECIALLY boring and sophomoric.
(4) Josh Lucas was terrible as a villain, with all the subtlety of Snidely Whiplash.

Posted by Big Sven | May 23, 2008 9:09 PM

What the hell do you retards know about movies? Men prancing about in leotards? Hello? An American in Paris? Gene Kelly wore leotards in a dozen movies, no superheroes necessary. Ang Lee. I swear to God, it's a terrible world.


Now where's that fucking whisky?

Posted by Fnarf | May 23, 2008 10:17 PM

i am not a cop, and i would like to get stoned off my ass like you are. do i buy at the office, or in the alley behind the office.

cpt., err, John Q.

Posted by mmbb | May 24, 2008 12:45 AM

Yeah, I dunno, seems like it'd be tough to enjoy comic book movies if you don't like comics to start with. Dudes (and chicks) running around in tights blowing shit up is kind of what it's all about.

Posted by shub-negrorath | May 24, 2008 1:44 AM

when he puts on the cop car gloves, aren't they suppose to say "HULK SMASH" when he hits the guy? or would they say cop things, like "HIT THE GROUND, FUCKER!"?

Posted by konstantconsumer | May 24, 2008 7:42 AM

@3 It wasn't a reimagining. It was a straight up retelling, done poorly. It was also a step backwards, both cinematically and for comics. The genius of Shuster and Siegel was that they broke out of four by four panel comics. Previous to them, that had been the format, from when comic books were simply packaging together daily strips. They went beyond that, and experimented with different frames, full page drawings, frames that burst into each other, breaking the fourth wall, and they did so inspired by movies.

What did Ang Lee do? He attempted to recreate comics on the screen, but the comics he attempted to recreate were the four by four panel format that had kept the art form stultified for so long.

If you want a powerful reimagining of the Hulk mythos, you can forget Ang Lee, and even Stan Lee, and turn to Peter David, who saw Bruce Banner as a man with multiple personality disorder, only physically manifesting those personalities, and saw psychology as a way of unifying them.

And finally, gamma poodles. Fucking gamma poodles. Those alone tanked Hulk.

Posted by Gitai | May 24, 2008 8:36 AM

I didn't hate the Ang Lee Hulk, but I don't watch every film with a critical, douchebag eye like some people I know. I prefer to watch a film to be entertained, so my standards are lower. It generally means when I watch a film and I think it's bad, it's like atrocious as hell.

So I didn't think the Bana Hulk was too bad, but it wasn't the best. Honestly I think this version will be far superior and I'm quite excited.

For some reason, though, it does kind of feel like Hulk doesn't translate well off the page. Perhaps because The Hulk is much more of a caricature and so wildly fantastic that it's hard to see him morphed into a reality-based medium. Hard to do.

Wherease the other superheroes aren't 9-feet-tall green manbeasts, so they are more humanized and plausible.

Perhaps that's the reason why people have a hard time with The Hulk?

Posted by Sam | May 24, 2008 9:07 AM


Posted by idaho | May 25, 2008 1:03 AM

Wow, that's some of the worst CGI I've ever seen.

Posted by Wolf | May 26, 2008 4:48 PM

That Hulk clip looks terrible. "Is that all you got?" Ugh. I hate the was most CGI scenes are directed - all slow, then jerk away, then slow, the jerk over there, then BOOM. I blame it on anime-obsessed techy worker bees in charge of those bits, but it could be that the Japanese just happen to refine the process before we did. Either way, it's the same shit over and over for the last few years.

Posted by Dougsf | May 27, 2008 12:58 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).