Author Topic: Hulk *spoilers*  (Read 3926 times)

EUOL

  • Moderator
  • Level 58
  • *****
  • Posts: 4708
  • Fell Points: 33
  • Mr. Prolific [tm]
    • View Profile
    • Brandon Sanderson dot com
Re: Hulk *spoilers*
« Reply #15 on: June 30, 2003, 04:37:13 AM »
70% is a big hit for the movie.  But, like I said, word of mouth is going to destroy this one.  It was marketed terribly.  Or, perhaps, it was marketed very cleverly.  It fooled people into thinking it was something it was not, which may be the only reason it managed to get a hundred million.  It should recoup its money, and with licensing and foreign sales make  money, but it's probably not going to be considered a success.  

Ang Lee was just wrong for this movie.  People wanted "hulk smash!" not "Hulk uncertain of his feelings for his father."  They wanted a walking tank, but not a psycho creature that could (for inexplicable reasons) leap huge distances.  They wanted a good, old-fashioned, understandable plot, not a strange "What the freak just happened with his father turning into a...whatever he turned into?"

And, to an extent, I kind of admit I agree with them.  While I liked the movie, a part of me is sad because I didn't get to see the Incredible Hulk, I got to see Ang Lee does superhero.
http://www.BrandonSanderson.com

"Technically, I don't even have a brain."--Fellfrosch

The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers

  • Administrator
  • Level 96
  • *****
  • Posts: 19211
  • Fell Points: 17
  • monkeys? yes.
    • View Profile
    • herb's world
Re: Hulk *spoilers*
« Reply #16 on: June 30, 2003, 11:20:20 AM »
I think I'm confused about Slant's rant. You did, or did not read the Hulk comics? From what I can tell, you wanted a smash 'em up, not anything that thinks. THat's not the Hulk I know. stan Lee may not be the smartest writer alive, but he makes good characters. CHARACTERS. Not WMDs. EUOL, what you saw on the screen WAS the Hulk. He jumps like that in the comic. His muscle to power ratio apparently aslo increases when he hulks out, which is the only way to rationally explain MOST of what he does.

I think Ang Lee did an INCREDIBLE job bringing the actual Hulk to the screen. The problem is, most people think that Lou Feregno did that. They want to see a cooler version of senseless violence, not a tormented creature with feelings that send him out of control as well as the abilities to give those feelings any avenue of expression they want.

Frankly, it's just another case of people thinking that comics are essentially wimpy "kid stuff" with no thoughtful content. Sorry, but the Hulk (and most superheroes) are much deeper than that. If that's not what you want, go watch another tarentino flick.

42

  • Staff
  • Level 56
  • *
  • Posts: 4350
  • Fell Points: 8
  • Unofficial World Saver
    • View Profile
Re: Hulk *spoilers*
« Reply #17 on: June 30, 2003, 11:56:55 AM »
I have to agree with SE, what I've read of the Hulk (which is not a lot), he's always been a introspective, brooding character who abhores violence but feels trapped by it. The comics seem to be entirely about the inner character conflict of the Hulk, not smashing things. Course, every cartoon or TV show episode I've seen seems to be more about Hulk smashing stuff.
The Folly of youth is to think that intelligence is a subsitute for experience. The folly of age is to think that experience is a subsitute for intelligence.

The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers

  • Administrator
  • Level 96
  • *****
  • Posts: 19211
  • Fell Points: 17
  • monkeys? yes.
    • View Profile
    • herb's world
Re: Hulk *spoilers*
« Reply #18 on: June 30, 2003, 12:14:37 PM »
This just goes to prove my theory that Germans love David Hasselhoff.

wait, wrong theory.

My theory that set expectations largely determine how entertaining a movie is. If you go into the Hulk with no expectations whatsoever but like good cinema, you'll probably like it. If, however, you have a preconceived notion of what the Hulk (or the film) is supposed to be like, and it doesnt' conform to Ang Lee's, well then, you're probably going to be disappointed.

I'm glad it wasn't just "Hulk smash puny humans!" (though I wanted to hear him say that). Because I don't particularly enjoy those movies in the long run. the way it is, I can enjoy the movie and look forward to enjoying it again in the future. Yes, this is definitely on my DVDs to buy list.

But my theory above is why I don't read reviews or allow myself to believe I know exactly what a movie will be like once I've made a decision to see it beyond the basics. Usually the basics are enough. Like, the essentially idea behind Dumb and Dumberer is slapstick and gross jokes. While that will make me laugh while I'm seeing it, I won't feel it was worth my $7 and I will have rather seen something else. So I won't go see it, I don't need to know how well the pratfalls are executed. The only things that would entice me to see it now is if a) i was sitting around bored and someone had a copy of it with them and popped it in my player, or b) I find out that they did actually have a meaningful story attached to it (and not one that contains a message that could be contained in 1 line at the end of a saturday morning cartoon.

Naturally, there are contradictions and some hypocrisy attached to this attitude. In some ways, I'm taking "first impression" of the advertising and letting that determine if I go or not. But mostly I'm just trying to keep my mind open that there are different ways to like a movie, the visual effects, the action, the comedy, the directing, the acting, the plot, et al. Liking a movie for one reason isn't inherantly superior to liking another, except for your personal tastes for how important those elements are to you.

I guess my problem with Slant's "nothing cool happens for the first hour" is that what are you saying is cool? Hulk beating up on a monster? No that doesn't happen. But the characters and themes that the movie explores before that were pretty cool to me, so I liked it.

EUOL

  • Moderator
  • Level 58
  • *****
  • Posts: 4708
  • Fell Points: 33
  • Mr. Prolific [tm]
    • View Profile
    • Brandon Sanderson dot com
Re: Hulk *spoilers*
« Reply #19 on: July 07, 2003, 03:06:19 AM »
Okay, let me respond to a few things.

First, I think you underestimate people when you say that people only wanted to see' a smash'em up.'  I also think that you are arrogant for assuming that your version of the hulk is the only one that deserves to be portrayed, while most of us grew to love what is apparently a different hulk, but still a good character.

On the first point.  This was billed as an action movie.  You cannot deny that.  It was sold by the advertisements to be fast-paced, and the clips showed the Hulk destroying lots of things.  People went expecting that.  It wasn't that people who went to see it were 'opposed to anything that thinks;' they simply were told to expect something they did not receive.  They wanted movie about a hero who overcomes great odds and does heroic things.  This movie was not an action movie, but a drama.  It's as if you went to T3, and it turned out to be the Hours.  That is not necessarily a personal complaint against the film, but rather the advertising.  As soon as I realized it wasn't what it had been billed to be, I still enjoyed it.  That is, however, why it is doing relatively poorly at the theaters.

As for the Hulk TV character, I was always fascinated by the Bruce character.  He went berserk, and afterward had to deal with the ramifications of his actions.  This may not be the Hulk you know, but it is the one many of us know.  In this way, we kind of did want to see something that 'doesn't think.'  The interesting character that I knew was one that lost control of himself--as a metaphor for our own tendencies toward anger--then had to learn to control and overcome this problem.  This is not a flat character--in fact, it makes for a much better Banner character, I think, than the one presented in the movie.  Again, this may not be what the comics portrayed, but it is what most of us expected to get.  You can say you're glad they chose the comic Hulk instead, because you prefer that character, but don't belittle the character many of us were hoping to see.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2003, 03:07:40 AM by EUOL »
http://www.BrandonSanderson.com

"Technically, I don't even have a brain."--Fellfrosch

The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers

  • Administrator
  • Level 96
  • *****
  • Posts: 19211
  • Fell Points: 17
  • monkeys? yes.
    • View Profile
    • herb's world
Re: Hulk *spoilers*
« Reply #20 on: July 07, 2003, 09:02:07 AM »
wait wait wait.

Weren't YOU the one who said people wanted to see a walking tank?

I guess I'm not sure who or what you're arguing against. Yes, I agree there were marketing problems (including what ads they ran with the flick), but what other character is there besides the flat one from the TV show? And even that shows that he hates and fears his anger. the comic/movie hulk is more complex because it also shows his family relationships, allowing the film to explore both territories.

Is what you're saying it that you *want* just a straightforward action flick with nothing else added? Sure, maybe that's what people expected (though the more I learn about public opinion the less I'm inclined to respect it) but I think it's a better film for not pursuing that route. Maybe the money will hurt it, but it's still a better film.

EUOL

  • Moderator
  • Level 58
  • *****
  • Posts: 4708
  • Fell Points: 33
  • Mr. Prolific [tm]
    • View Profile
    • Brandon Sanderson dot com
Re: Hulk *spoilers*
« Reply #21 on: July 08, 2003, 02:49:46 AM »
You can have a good, old fashioned action flick and still have a good plot and good characterization.  The Matrix, at its core, is just a very well-done action flick.  T2 would be another example.

Yes, people wanted to see a walking tank that smashed things--on the Hulk side.  Then they wanted to see Bruce Banner have to deal with this monsterous side of his personality.  The father interaction took up so much of the movie that it didn't leave much time for Bruce to deal with what was happening to him.  While I agree that it was still a good movie, I think it would have actually been a better movie if it would have been more sure of what it wanted to be.  

I said I was a little sad that I didn't get to see 'Hulk smash.'  This is partially because the movie was mis-represented to me.  However, I don't think saying this implies that I only wanted to see 'hulk smash.'  That is just a part of the greater whole I was hoping to see.
http://www.BrandonSanderson.com

"Technically, I don't even have a brain."--Fellfrosch

Chaosman

  • Level 3
  • ***
  • Posts: 40
  • Fell Points: 0
  • Pie, oh yeah, I like pie
    • View Profile
    • Ledgermain Comics
Re: Hulk *spoilers*
« Reply #22 on: July 19, 2003, 11:20:07 PM »
I actually hadn't read any Hulk comics, but I expected him to be at the very least fighing 'evil'. We didn't really get to see that here. He fought off some Hulk Dogs and ran from the Army. Hardly superhero fare.
I wasn't as impressed with the adaptation as I think I could have been.
A plan is something you make before its needed. A good plan is one you make two seconds before you need it.

The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers

  • Administrator
  • Level 96
  • *****
  • Posts: 19211
  • Fell Points: 17
  • monkeys? yes.
    • View Profile
    • herb's world
Re: Hulk *spoilers*
« Reply #23 on: July 20, 2003, 08:37:18 AM »
*sigh*

You say you haven't read the material and then say you're upset with the adaptation. You're not making sense.

The Hulk in the comics usually says "Hulk Smash" as the consequence of the army not listening when he says "Leave Hulk alone."

Running from the army was his primary gig for 20+ years. Hulk does fight evil, but it's eternal. He's not rational, so he usually doesn't think "I must use my powers for good." That doesn't come until he manages to fuse the banner consciousness with the Hulk form. Which changes the character ENTIRELY.

Note, this doesn't mean you have to like it, but let's please stop complaining that it "wasnt' like the comic" or "isn't superhero." This is EXACTLY what was in mind when the character was created.

No, it didn't meet many expectations. But I thought it was pretty darn good as a movie. Though the plot, I'll repeat, was a bit icky.