That’s the Hulk, kids. Up on the screen, big as life. Starting at a slow jog across the desert, picking up speed until he’s moving like a locomotive, then one or two short jumps, faster and faster, and then he’s gone over the mountains in a two mile vault.
More below (and, in the interest of full disclosure, yes, I wrote the novelization, so if some of you think that connection would render me unable to make unbiased commentary, you’re free to do so.)
Is the CGI dodgy in some places? Yeah. So was Spider-Man. But forget all the paranoia from the half-finished Superbowl stuff that was put out there purely to let the public know this wasn’t going to be a guy in green body make-up and a fright wig. For the most part, the CGI is, well, incredible. Not only are the Hulk vs. army sequences great (the Hulk idly tapping his open palm with a busted rocket launcher after demolishing four tanks is laugh-out-loud hilarious) but what the commericals and previews can’t begin to convey is the miraculous close-up face work that is simply beyond belief. His range of expression is as unlimited as that possessed by any human face (David Duchovny and Al Gore notwithstanding.)
As for the rest of the film, Ang Lee tries something unprecedented. He endeavors to convey the story using comic book style storytelling, with panel inserts sliding in and out of the picture. It’s inventive, it’s dangerous, and I suspect individual viewers will either love it or hate it. There’s really no middle ground. If you hate it, it’s going to ruin the movie for you. If you love it, as I did, it’s going to be a kick to watch. Eric Bana’s great. Jennifer Connelly is great. Sam Elliot as a remarkably nuanced Thunderbolt is great. And Nick Nolte is astonishingly restrained as Banner pere, wisely reining in a part that could have left teethmarks all over the scenery (except for one ultra crazed outburst toward the end, and yet he makes even that work.)
The film takes a while to build. It’s slowed by techno-jargon about nanomed research and such, as if the filmmakers were concerned that modern audiences wouldn’t accept the notion that being hit by gamma rays would change Banner into the Hulk. That we know too much about radiation these days to think anything other than that it would kill him, and so “nanomeds” had to be added to the storyline to make it believable. Newsflash: Nothing makes transforming into the Hulk “believable.” You buy the premise, you buy the bit, simple as that. A lot of things could have been streamlined or cut altogether, including an entire flashback sequence of Betty and Bruce at a cabin. Then again, the original “Superman” film took a while to really get going (remember, Superman didn’t appear until an hour in, and then only for about ten seconds), so be prepared for a leisurely pace with an awareness that once the film gets going, it really moves. Only real problem not easily solved is the climax of the film, which is set at night *and* underwater so it’s tough to see, and is confusing from a storytelling aspect as well. Then again, that’s why God created novelizations.
PAD
• 
I read the novelization and thought it was, well, …enh. Not really because of the writing, but more because of the story you worked with. I know movies take liberties with the source material and sometimes are the better for it, but I was a little put off by who Hulk’s final opponent was. I’ll not spoil it here. One good thing, at lest Bruce still becomes the Hulk because of a selfless act on his part.
Glad the CGI lived up to expectations, or, rather, surpassed them. I also was worried by the commercials’ seeming lack of sophistication. Given that you liked it, I think I can live with the Gamma Dogs.
You know what’s great about this movie? ANG LEE did the Motion Capture for the Hulk. Seriously. I watched the special on the Sci Fi channel and it’s terrific.
Hulk looks great and his movements looked great(nice job by psycho ang)
but be Warned: the show a lot of hulk footage(i mean a lot. It was surprising)
It really pìššëd me off when someone said he looked like Shrek. What bûllšhìŧ. The Hulk’s been around for 41 years, and the way he looks in the movie is pretty much the way he looked in the book (except that his face resembles Bruce’s, a point not specifically made until Leonard Samson merged his personalities in #377, but which was in the movie so that Betty could recognize the Hulk as Bruce).
Can’t wait to see the movie. Did you get all nostalgic and want to do another Hulk project? Oh yeah, Congrats on TMNT selling out, looking forward to more great stuff coming up!
Hmmm . . . I don’t know . . . My opinion mirrors a lot of what John Byrne seems to be getting it in his column over at slushfactory.com . . . that if such changes (like adding ‘gamma dogs’ for example, or to use Mr. Byrne’s example, a Bruce Banner that enjoys becoming the Hulk) were instantaneously made within a comic book, it wouldn’t be accepted since it would directly contradict what has come before, but because these kinds of changes (like Wolverine calling Cyclops a, “dìçk,”) are made in the comic-to-movie transition, they’re acceptable.
Maybe my standards for comic book films are too high.
I’ll wait for HULK to hit DVD . . .
Off-Topic–but still Hulk-ish!
Did anybody else here buy the Animated INCREDIBLE HULK DVD just to get the “exclusive interview” with PAD? The problem is when I click on the “Who is Peter David?” option on the special features menu, I get about 1 minute of PAD introducing himself and…that’s it! Not quite the in-depth interview I was hoping for.
Is this just a defect in the DVD I bought? If not, what the hëll happened?
By the way, the “Inside the Hulk” trivia feature is very cool!
Mike Decker
The Inside the Hulk feature was the “Exclusive Interview”.
Peter, do you know if they plan to release further DVDs of the 1996 animated series?
Well, I don’t mind liberties for the movies/tv as long as it’s not too much. Smallville good, Birds of Prey bad.
I’m really hoping this film does well just because I heard a rumor of Mr. Fix-it in the sequel.
PAD,
Just want to know if you feel a bit dissapointed or maybe frustrated? After all, you pretty much defined the relationship that the Hulk had with his father, and although it was changed slightly for the movie, or not so slightly since I haven’t seen it, doesn’t it just get you in the gut when you see someone else capitalize on your ideas? You mentioned that you liked seeing some of your creations in the Hulk video game, and you mentioned if you thought you’d get any royalties… Althought you didn’t do the Gamma Dogs, that was obviously taken right from the Dogs of War series after the relaunch, and I doubt if anyone will miss that and give due credit.
Just wondering.
Shteve
Regarding the “I like it” line…
John Byrne has taken that out of context. Banner doesn’t simply say, “I like being the Hulk.” He says that it scares him to think that once it (the Hulk) has come over him and taken over, once Bruce has totally lost control, he likes it.
How many times have we seen Banner step in front of a machine to transform him into the Hulk? Undo a cure for silly reasons like “Samson is romancing Betty. I’ll become the Hulk again and beat him up.”
Bruce in the movie realizes the Hulk is a part of him and the realization that this part of him likes losing control scares him.
Byrne acts as if Banner was telling Betty, “Man, I wish I was the Hulk right now so I could smash something!”
Can’t wait to see this.
And, Mr. David, good job on the Hulk DVD trivia. I’m glad they got someone who knows the Hulk instead of someone hip and fresh. No offense as I’m neither hip nor fresh.
But, in regards to one of the Leader tidbits, you (in your old HULK comics) never did explain how he survived that fall into the volcano. He just kinda showed up.
JONAHTHAN :
yes, You pretty much say all on John Byrne
“a Bruce Banner that enjoys becoming the Hulk) were instantaneously made within a comic book, it wouldn’t be accepted since it would directly contradict what has come before”
Mr. Koch, respectfully, have you ever read more than a couple of issues of Hulk? Mr. Byrne obviously hasn’t. This in NO WAY contradicts what has come before. Sure, Banner has tried to cure himself… yet somehow, he never managed to. In Mr. Byrnes own words in HULK #1 and #4 there were several cures to Banner’s condition, yet he always found a way to go back to being the Hulk. Why? Because he’s addicted to the power. Deep down, he doesn’t really want to give it up. PAD touched on this briefly in the Hulk guest appearance in CAPT MARVEL. But there are plenty of other instances, as well.
Saw the movie last night. Enjoyed it but think X-2 is better. Hulk does’nt look quiet as ‘real’ as Gollum.
I don’t exactly figure out the ending, (how did he beat his father) guess have to buy the novelization.
On another note, if the movie is a big hit and they decide to another animated series, I wish they adopt the look of the video game instead of normal tv level animation of the 90’s cartoon.
Have to say that sight unseen, the notion of making a film looking like a comic book is offputting. I think I want my films to look like films.
Cannot say that between this, the bits of plot I’ve heard, and my boredom with Crouching Tiger that I am rushing out to see it. But if the true Master of GammaLand recommends it, I figure I’ve got to see it sooner rather than later.
Can’t help but note that the first post in this thread came from Rick Jones. Still can’t believe they left you out of the film, Rick. But there’s always Captain America, and Captain Marvel, and Rom, and Avengers. 🙂
Derek M. Koch: that if such changes (like adding ‘gamma dogs’ for example, or to use Mr. Byrne’s example, a Bruce Banner that enjoys becoming the Hulk) were instantaneously made within a comic book…
Luigi Novi: I don’t think Bruce enjoying it on some psychological level is really a change from the book. I think that that line by him in the movie really represents merely a conflicted, more repressed part of his personality. He presumably hates it as much as the comic Bruce, and I wouldn’t have been surprised if Peter or anyone else wrote that line in the comic. People, and fictional characters, for that matter, possess both conscious and unconscious feelings that contradict one another. The transformation into the Hulk has always represented something of a double-edged sword; a dichotomy, as Universal has advertised for press screenings, between “wish fulfillment and nightmare.” That Bruce has conflicted feelings about it doesn’t seem like a change from the source material at all.
Shteve: [Peter] much defined the relationship that the Hulk had with his father, and although it was changed slightly for the movie…
Luigi Novi: It seemed to be more than a slight change to me. Bruce didn’t even remember his father, and while David Banner was megalomaniacally irresponsible with Bruce in experimenting on him, he wasn’t physically abusive towards him per se. The entire way that their relationship played into the Hulk’s personality in the book was totally lost in the movie, IMHO.
>>>Mark: But, in regards to one of the Leader tidbits, you (in your old HULK comics) never did explain how he survived that fall into the volcano. He just kinda showed up.
Actually, it was explained–very subtly–in IH #342. He used a matter transporter to save himself.
“He endeavors to convey the story using comic book style storytelling, with panel inserts sliding in and out of the picture.”
Interesting — that’s the narrative conceit George Romero used in CREEPSHOW, and it (IMO) fit that film perfectly. I’m interested to see how a more visually poetic filmmaker like Lee pulls it off…
SC
Hey, Simon. Sure you’re just being sarcastic (hard as that is to believe on an internet comment board), but that’s really my name. Been that way for longer than I care to think about in this moment of onrushing birthdays. Of course, I still remember the moment of pure adrenaline-rush excitement when I was eight and read my first Hulk comic book and there was my name on a character. It’s nice to see my namesake so well remembered.
On another Green subject, just reading The Pulse news site and found out TMNT #1 sold out! Congratulations!
MODERATE SPOILERS re: opinion but not story.
I have to say I really enjoyed the movie on a number of levels. Without giving anything away – I had done interviews with Ang Lee, Stan Lee, Avi Arad, Jen Connelly, Peter, Eric Bana, etc – and I could not imagine some of what they all were talking about until I saw it on screen.
The multi-panels were done effectively and were in no way cheesy. Ang Lee really is an artist.
I do have to say that the film struck me more like a classic horror movie such as King Kong or Frankenstein than as a comic book super-hero movie. And they spent a substantial amount of time making you care about the characters before they got to the so-called “good-stuff”.
When I saw the HULK on screen, the effects were admittedly imperfect at times, but astounding at others. They got the true spirit of the comic book when the Hulk was rampaging. As for whether the Hulk SFX worked 100% of the time, well, I basically realized that if I allowed the “realness” of the effects to play a role in my enjoyment of the film, I might as well give up watching Harryhausen films or King Kong movies altogether.
So, judging it on the basis of: is it a good film? Yes. Slow at times, with artistic moments more suitable to THE ICE STORM occassionally, but I give Lee huge gobs of credit for what he was attempting. And I think there’s enough success in his film that it deserves our support as comic fans and Hulk fans if only because he takes the source material SERIOUSLY. He’s faithful enough to the spirit of the comic book.
If we fail to allow artists to attempt new things in the comic source material we love, then we will only have ourselves to blame if filmmakers start to fall back on “BATMAN FOREVER” garbage.
The one thing I have to give Avi Arad credit for: He truly loves and believes in the source material – he even found the emotional core in BROTHER VOODOO, and actually made me realize that there could be a good television series there.
So, jumping off my very short soap-box for a moment – I agree with Peter — that is the Hulk on screen. For whatever issues “purists” may end up having with the movie or the story or anything else – go see it so that you can understand just what Lee and Kirby had in mind when Hulk Smashed all over the American southwest way back when.
Oh, and as for the effects unveiled last January – suffice it to say that the animators were no happier than you were – especially because in the commercials, the Hulk is often sped up a bit, detracting from the reality of the effects. You must see it on a big screen.
Final note and then I’ll shut up: there is a moment in the film that truly gave me chills – made me understand for the first time in decades just what is so scary about the Hulk – and worth the price of admission… and I wouldn’t give it away for anything.
Mark wrote, “Mr. Koch, respectfully, have you ever read more than a couple of issues of Hulk? Mr. Byrne obviously hasn’t.”
I don’t know, John Byrne’s run on the Hulk was actually my favorite 80’s run on the book before PAD came around … so he must have read an issue or two somewhere along the line since he had a decent run on the series.
Byrne’s take on the Hulk (from memory since I haven’t read the issues in a while), pretty much had Bruce Banner doing anything he could to rid himself of the Hulk. At one point he succeeded and they were two beings. Banner was left wheelchair bound and led a band of “Hulk Busters” to capture and kill the raging Hulk. (Hey it was the mid-1980’s and Ghostbusters was still hot).
Byrne’s column isn’t really about the Hulk, BTW. If you’ve read it you’ll see that he’s talking about the movies and the changes they have made in the movies to characters that may not have gone over well if the mainstream comics characters were changed. He based his observations on doing a number of those type of changes in Spider-Man Chapter One and X-Men: The Hidden Years.
In one line he mentioned that he feels that the Bruce Banner in the movie likes becoming the Hulk. Okay, he’s allowed his interpretation of it; he’s seen the movie, I haven’t, and if he wants to think that then let him think that. It simply isn’t the end of the world.
I’m not a big Byrne fan, but he does have his points and I think he should be allowed his take on Marvel movies (which the article was about), even if you feel he’s wrong.
(Byrne’s article: http://www.slushfactory.com/content/EpVullVAluHuPAsvmK.php)
k9
Quick follow up to add to the discussion:
If YOU had the powers of the hulk, how would you feel about it?
Would it scare you or would you embrace it?
k9
i bought the novel and i thought it was excellent.. i’m looking forward to see the film…
Is the title a response to this review: http://slate.msn.com/id/2084617/ ? BTW, you should keep the green color permanently.
I picked up the Incredible Hulk cartoon DVD at Target today.
The main impetus was the 1966 episode which adapted the Origin of the Hulk.
Seeing the Jack Kirby art and listening to the actors doing the voices of the characters was interesting.
Rick Jones sounded like James Dean.
General Ross sounded like Edward G. Robinson.
The Gorgon (Gargoyle) sounded like Marlon Brando.
Paul Soles, who would do the voice of Peter Parker/Spider-Man in the series was the voice of Bruce Banner.
John Vernon, who was the voice of Iron Man in the ’60s cartoon, as well as Glenn Talbot in the Hulk cartoon, was the voice of General Ross in the 1996 cartoon, and it was a treat seeing Thunderbolt lecturing millionaire industrialist Tony Stark.
Vernon would also do the voice of Dr. Strange in the Fox Spider-Man cartoon, with George Takei as Wong.
I enjoyed Stan’s soapbox and always regarded The Hulk as a sympathetic character since all he wants is peace and quiet, and all these soldiers show up to shoot at him.
I’d love to see more DVD’s on the Hulk (especially John Rhys-Davies as Thor, as he did on the F.F. cartoon) and other heroes, such as Captain America, Thor, Sub-Mariner, Iron Man, and Spider-Man.
It’s great how the Daredevil Vs. Spider-Man DVD had the Kingpinned episode from the ’60s, complete with next week promos.
The interview with the creator/writer feature was fun (I haven’t checked out the Wolverine’s Revenge one with Claremont)
It’d be great if they got to interview writers like Len Wein, who wrote an episode of the Hulk, where Bruce Banner meets up with Walter Langkowski and the Hulk tangles with Sasquatch.
It’d be nice to see interviews with artists, such as John Romita Sr., Ðìçk Ayers, Gene Colan, and have them asked about what they think the appeal of the characters is?
If they keep making DVDs as fun as these, I’m gonna keep buying them.
In comics and cartoons, on TV and in the movies, HULK is the strongest one there is.
Steve Chung
Peter:
Considering all that the Hulk and Bruce Banner have been through, both psycologically and physically; where do you think it will all end?
Other than finishing what you were doing and make one whole person from the two(?), about the only thing they haven’t done seems to be letting Banner exhibit some of the Hulk’s physical strength, which in my opinion would be the beginning of the final merger, whatever the ultimate outcome.
“John Byrne’s run on the Hulk was actually my favorite 80’s run on the book before PAD came around …”
I stopped reading the HULK (and most other comics shortly after this. So I unfortunately can’t compare PAD’s likely interesting take on the character.
But I do know that I agree with the above comment. One scene says it all for me.
Doc Samson has just arrived at the scene of a Hulk/Avengers slugfest and is telling the Avengers powerhouses (Power Man, Iron Man, etc) to stand down, he’ll take care of the Hulk. They don’t like his butting in, insisting they need to go stop that menace.
Doc Samson stares them down, pointing to the utterly devastated town around them. “Look around you, at the destruction your fight with the Hulk has caused. Then tell me who is the greater menace.”
Rick, I wasn’t trying ot be sarcastic so much as just a bit silly. Simply put, I couldn’t resist the joke. Guess I should have. Apology offered for cheap humor. (Should have learned by now to leave that to PAD.)
Although Mr. Byrne is certainly entitled to his opinions, he took a quote out of context and criticized the movie before he had even seen it. He also contradicted things that he himself had written into his second run of the Hulk comics.
Caught a midnight showing of the movie last night. I posted my own review here.
It’s got clearly marked spoilers in it, for anyone that cares.
Phinn
I really think this HULK movie needs to be judged on three different levels.
1. As a film in general, it’s pretty good. It takes a long time to get going (show someone just the first 15 or 20 minutes of the movie and they’ll think it’s a “chick flick” about how a woman’s bad relationship with her father affects her relationships with other men), but once it picks up it really moves. I respect and appreciate the seriousness Ang Lee takes with the story but I’m not sure that’s the best way to start off a film that people will come into with certain expectations.
2. As a film about the Hulk, it’s great. I’d rank it as one of the best big screen representations of a super-human character ever and it had a visual kick that I never got from Matrix Reloaded.
3. As a film about Bruce Banner, it’s a failure. For the vast majority of this film, Bruce is barely more than a McGuffin on which the story turns. This movie is really about Betty Ross first, David Banner second, with Bruce battling “Thunderbolt” Ross for third. It’s not like SUPERMAN: THE MOTION PICTURE because that did concentrate on Clark Kent and built up to Superman’s appearance. HULK sets up Bruce’s gamma exposure plotwise, but there’s no emotional or thematic build to it.
It’s good to have someone like Ang Lee take the creative chances he does with a film like this, but people shouldn’t walk out of a Hulk movie more interested in Betty Ross than Bruce Banner.
Mike
RE: Byrne/LIKING turning into the Hulk..
How come people don’t consider the following scenario (and yes, he does take that quote out of context)..
He likes changing because it’s the only time he can TRULY let himself feel emotion. Throughout the film/comic, he’s always repressed, keeping stuff bottled up. This is why I like the Ultimate Hulk despite it drastically appearing different on the surface.
Both deal with a reserved man, who makes a tragic mistake, and finds an outlet for all his emotions.
Ah well.. it’s a spectacular film.. go see it!
-T
I just saw it today. I thought it was pretty good. I like how they threw the two cameos together in the beginning, with both Stan Lee and Lou Ferrigno walking out of the building as security guards. My one major dislike: no Rick Jones. Oh well, there’s always the sequel.
I love how John Byrne protests against movies sight unseen, and then rails against those who review his work without having read it.
I saw it and thought it was a fine first movie. I look at the improvements made with X2 (though I liked the first one a lot) and am anxious for the next Spidey, DD and Hulk. It’s nice that they are letting these filmmakers do the sequels (assuming Ang Lee does do the sequel). As for Hulk, sure some spots had weak animation and the story lacked some focus at times and the ending is rather murky without the benefit of reading the novel (though it really takes BOTH of them to really get the ending since it is hard to just describe what was going on). The trailer had bits weren’t in the movie (GOOD bits, too) and the movie could have stood for a little shaving on time. It’s funny that Spidey 1 needed some time cut, X1 needed MORE time, and DD needed to lose some plot (I agree that the father confrontation would have been a better sequel). The animation on Hulk, even when weak, was still well done. It just sometimes looked like animation is all. I’m glad to see that the animators are being allowed to act more and more (except with Matrix Reloaded which had animation that would have pìššëd me offf in a video game… Burly Brawl my ÃSS!!). My last
COMMENT: there sure were a lot of crotch hit jokes in this movie. XMen said “dìçk” and Hulk just kept having people get hit in it!
>>I love how John Byrne protests against movies sight unseen, and then rails against those who review his work without having read it. <<
Yeah, but to be honest, he’s MUCH harsher on those who review his work after having read it and don’t agree with his own opinion of his work. ^_^
I’m surprised there isn’t more furor over the Hulk attacking our nation’s heroes like that.
I thought the acting and the effects were great. CGI was well done, especially towards the end. I did not approve of the new “twist” in the origin. He’s got sprayed by gamma rays in a gamma bomb test. Go there and leave it at that.
Gah…
He got sprayed. My apologies.
<>
I thought he got belted.
Sadly, I found the movie pretty disappointing. The story was needlessly overcomplicated, then chunks of dialogue were wasted explaining the all the details. A few scenes seemed completely unnecessary, the film definitely could have been shorter.
I liked the idea of the scene changes- but they would have been better served in an exciting action film, not a slow, wordy movie like “Hulk” unfortunately is.
The Hulk himself, though, was awesome. It’s actually kind of sad that I found the CGI character to give the best performance in the film! (Then again, I found that with Gollum too.) Nick Nolte was laughable, and Bana and Connelly had no chemistry.
It’s too bad, I really wanted to like this movie.
After seeing the movie, I’ve just three comments:
1). Would it really have killed the screenwriters to name the scientist that Bruce saves Rick Jones?
2). I thought the CGI Hulk was pretty boss, but next movie, they should get WETA.
3). I loved the “comic booking” of the movie, right down to the fonts used for the credits.
Peter, regardless of whether you wrote the novelization or not (I read it a few months back and loved it), your throughts and feelings about the Hulk are as desired as anyone elses. I happen to think you are also correct about the CGI looking and working great. If I might plug it, I posted a review at Comics -N- Such where I give ILM top grades for their work on the character. The seething rage we saw on the screen was mind numbing… wow.
But alas I think Ang Lee was forced to cut too many corners to keep the movie as short as it was. I don’t think we got enough back ground on what makes Banner tick and what we did get I think could have been better illistrated with your scene from the novelization (you’ll kill your mother)….
All in all I gave it a B-
Does anyone know if Lee and Kirby were credited in the credits?
I thought it was an ok movie for most of it. The biggest problem I had was the Hulk poodle. Hulk poodle? Come on!
What really bothered me was the end. The end ruined the movie because it didn’t make a whole lot of sense. Here, you have Thunderbolt hooking Banner up in an electric chair so if he gets excited, he fries. Yet, what happens? Papa Banner is allowed to go and talk to his son. That made no sense! There was no reason given to allow a homocidal certifiable lunatic access to the one person who would be enraged by him and can’t be allowed to be enraged.
Also, what happened in the end? After Papa Banner takes Bruce out to the desert, I have no clue what happens to either one of them. I’d say more but I don’t want to totally spoil the end.
If it hadn’t been for the ending, I would thought it wasn’t that bad of a movie, but the ending was just terrible.
Yeah, the ending was horrendous. I can see a reason why his father was allowed to meet him, though. Betty probably set it up through her father because she felt he needed “closure” with his father.
Of course, we’ll never tell until the DVD comes out with the extra footage (hopefully).
Yes, Lee AND Kirby are credited. Heaven help us if they weren’t, it woud only give the professional Internet dectractors another reason to dislike this movie.
By the way, this was a really good movie, much better than it had to be considering the pre-sold audience. However, I saw it Friday night at 8:00 P.M. and the theater was only 3/4 full. That can’t bode well come time for a sequel.
The prelim box office figures for Friday came in earlier this morning… aprox $23.8 million, which puts it on track to earn that $50-60 million the studio was looking for. However the movie really needed to make more than that the first weekend. I posted an article about it HERE.
I’m worried this movie is going to be the first money loser for the studio/Marvel…. really worried.