Going around the net, I’ve been reading posting after posting regarding the reputed underperformance of “The Hulk” at the box office. What’s amazing to me is the utter glee that so many are taking in that. This warped sense of vindication, this joy that one of the more thoughtful entries in the superhero film genre is not enjoying the wide audience success of “X-Men” or “Spider-Man.” The German word “Schadenfreude” summarizes the attitude nicely: It means to take pleasure in other people’s misfortunes.
Guys…you think the script they filmed had problems? I read earlier drafts before any of the current creative personnel were aboard. No Betty. No General Ross. No resemblance whatsoever to the comic book in any incarnation. The Hulk got around by tearing off the roof of a car, hopping in and driving away.
Yet I see all this chortling and “Thank God there won’t be a Hulk II.” If that should be the case…how is this a good thing? Who’s to say the sequel wouldn’t have been better?
Instead poor performance simply encourages Hollywood money men to be less inclined to invest the kind of money that’s required to do comic book movies right. This is Not A Good Thing.
PAD
• 
It dissapoints me as well that people are so used to mindless summer Blockbusters that the Hulk was actually too smart for most people. I enjoyed it because it explored characters and wasnt just explosions but that seems to be what people want these day.
Things like FAst and the Furious 2 and Bad Boys 2.
We’ll be seeing allot more of that type of stuff with Hulks failure.
What kills me is the idea that some have that a comic inspired film should be a cinematic replica of the source material. Film is an art form as well as entertainment, and Ang Lee’s Hulk is an excellent, artistic film IMHO.
Between TV show fans and comic fans and general moviegoers – you cannot please everyone.
I’m just glad Ang was allowed to make it a quality film – an unusual quality for a summer blockbuster.
I think Peter’s novelization was far superior to the script and movie, but the material Peter was given to work with was still far below what I would have expected from a Hulk film and far below what I would have expected of Mr. David if he had come up with this material by himself. He is a much better writer and scriptor than what we were witness to in this film’s story. I don’t think the Hulk was less successful because it was too smart for people, if anything it was far too mindless in that the people involved didn’t really take the time to understand the material. Usually when you apply for a job you have to have experience in the field and for someone to just hand over a 150 million dollar movie to someone who’s never read the books is insane and none of the true spirit of the comic book that I would label “smart” was anywhere to be found. Many of the aspects of this movie were quite brainless both in concept and delivery. Just because the CGI Hulk looks impressive and resembles the comic book counterpart doesn’t mean it’s a Hulk movie with all flaws and detracting portions to the contrary suddenly forgiven. It shouldn’t be a replica of the source material either because it has to be artistic in the medium which it is being presented, but that does not and should not mean that the source material should be destroyed to fit into the movie mold. Anyone who understands the characters and their story can craft a faithful, respectful and exciting presentation whether it be in a comic, movie or radio show and have them all make sense as a whole and recognizable as the same characters regardless of medium.
“..to just hand over a 150 million dollar movie to someone who’s never read the books is insane..”
Bryan Singer never read the X-Men comic books either, so it’s hardly an insane idea. A director/writer either understands a character or not. Years of comic reading should not be necessary. The main thing I want from a superhero movie is to capture the true spirit of the character. The Hulk movie delivered that.
The earlier post is correct. How come everyone is complaining about the (reletivly) minor changes that Holloywood is making to characters compared to the major changes that are being made in the Ultimate line. Heck, look at what Byrne did to Superman. I hope you are all doing what I am, that is, not buying any Ultimate line comics out of principle.
James, somehow I’m picturing you in 1956, refusing to buy any issues of the Flash starring Barry Allen “on principle”…
+++Instead poor performance simply encourages Hollywood money men to be less inclined to invest the kind of money that’s required to do comic book movies right. This is Not A Good Thing.+++
I disagree. With the success of the X-Men movies, the Blade movies, and Spider-Man, even the dimmest bulb in Hollyweird knows that comic book movies sell.
Would Hulk failing at the box office change that? No. But you know what Hulk being a wild success at the box office would mean? It’d mean that more crappy comic book movies would be made. I mean, really, who wants to see comic based movies if they’re all going to be as boring as the Hulk or as ridiculously stupid as Batman Forever? Are those the kinds of comic book movies you want all the time?
The goal here, Peter, is to get GOOD comic adaptations. What’s the point of getting a comic adapted to the movies if it blows in nearly every conceivable way?
The Hulk failing at the box office doesn’t mean that a Superman movie won’t be made. It just means that MAYBE MAYBE MAYBE someone will get the bright idea that, hey, a more faithful telling of the story would do better at the box office, rather than a story in which Superman’s costume is like Spider-Mans’ symbiote suit and in which Lex Luthor is a Kryptonian. THAT kind of garbage is what’ll kill the comic movie genre. Crappy and/or boring movies.
You want to send a message to Hollywood? Then go see X2, if you haven’t already, or see it again. Buy it when it comes out on DVD, along with the first. Get the Spider-Man DVD while you’re at it. And be there opening night when Spider-Man 2 opens. But for cripes sake, don’t go see the Hulk. That making any amount of money will only convince the folks at Hollywood that they can put out any old dreck under an established brand and that people will gobble it up no matter what.
I’m not taking any glee in this. Do you think I WANTED to come out of that theatre feeling gipped and bored out of my skull? Hëll no. I’m a huge Hulk fan (As a matter of fact, I still have a large chunk of the Peter David run of the Hulk in my closet). But the fact is, Hulk deserved a better movie. And if Hulk makes any kind of respectable money, it’ll only encourage the suits to put out another piece of drek. Maybe some of you LIKE sitting through crap as long as it’s got a name that’s familiar to you, but me, I’d prefer something be made well or not be made at all, rather than sit through 2 hours of utter garbage (Whether it be Hulk, Batman Forever, or Superman IV: The Quest for Peace).
I love it when people say the film has flaws – then point out none. The first half of the film only dragged for some because they could not wait to see the Hulk and more of him. They wanted to see it more of an all action film rather than both a serious drama AND an action film. No one would admit this, but it is true.
Ang’s big mistake was making an intelligent art house film to a fanboy audience expecting HULK SMASH and lots of it.
PAD is correct – this film is very faithful to the comic by Hollywood standards. Anyone hear about the upcoming Superman film with Lex as a Kryptonian and with a flying Superman suit as if Superman were the Greatest American Hero??? That’s the norm, folks.
No offense, but most of the complaining about Ang Lee’s choices usually sounds like nothing more than fanboy whining.
Regardless, this topic is about the relish and glee that some people are enjoying over the incorrect perception that the film failed. I hope these people are happy when the Hulk in Hulk 2 is a guy in a foam rubber suit and the script written by a committee. Doesn’t anyone remember the horrible Marvel based movies in the 70s and 80s? Is that what you want? What is wrong with supporting this rare boom in the genre? You can encourage it to get better without joyfully ripping the films to shreds. The SCHADENFREUDE is ugly at best.
X2 differed from the comics as much or more than the Hulk did. Character origins, ages, ad other details were altered. The main difference is that the Hulk script was original and the X2 script was based on “God Loves, Man Kills”.
I thought X2 was great, by the way, but I admit I enjoyed the Hulk more. The Hulk was more thought out and deeply layered. That is why I enjoyed it even more the second time I saw it.
The earlier post is correct. How come everyone is complaining about the (reletivly) minor changes that Holloywood is making to characters compared to the major changes that are being made in the Ultimate line. Heck, look at what Byrne did to Superman. I hope you are all doing what I am, that is, not buying any Ultimate line comics out of principle.
In comics they can always get away with anything by just labelling it a what if story or an alternate timeline story or an elseworlds tale, when you put the Hulk on the big screen for the first time you would expect the real version to be the focus of the movie, not something that is yet another version of something else. And yes X2 was based on Man Loves, God Kills even thought it hardly resembled it, but at least someone did in fact read the X-men story prior to writing the script, there was an attempt at least. In the case of the Hulk it seems that James Schamus just looked at some Hulk covers, was briefed by Stan Lee and then made the rest up. I think Ang Lee deserves alot of credit for allowing his name to be the spearhead of this project leaving Schamus virtually immune to the stupidity he conjured up. Ang Lee was the lamb for both Schamus and Universal who hired him more as a brand name than for his ability. If you are going to go that art house route then let the man create his vision. Instead you get the studio stepping in and re-cutting the film to their liking and throwing Mychael Danna clear out the door to be replaced with Elfman and then claiming in press releases that they hired Elfman because he was so great at superhero scores and the perfect choice for the Hulk? Poor Ang Lee, he’s gotta take the blame for the whole mess; The Hulk poodles, the chopped and disfigured plot, the nonsensical story and that thing that Nolte turned into. I understand why fans are a little ticked off, I expected to see a movie about the Hulk not something of an alternate universe retelling. Scrap the sequel, they should just do the first movie over again. Ang can stay, but someone please keep Schamus the away. If they can replace Danna with Elfman they sure as hëll could replace Schamus with Peter David.
I love it when people say the film has flaws – then point out none. The first half of the film only dragged for some because they could not wait to see the Hulk and more of him. They wanted to see it more of an all action film rather than both a serious drama AND an action film. No one would admit this, but it is true.
Um…no. The first half of the film dragged because it was badly paced. Also, the dialogue was overwritten and stilted, and Eric Bana wasn’t convincing as an emotionally repressed character. And on a more trivial note, changing Bruce’s last name to Krenzler was just silly. I kept expecting him to say, “My name is Fran-ken-STEIN!”
As for the “action film” second half, the CGI effects were so unconvincing, they took me out of the movie. I felt as though I were watching a bad video game. On top of that, the fight scenes were so murkily staged, they were nearly impossible to follow. And the Hulk’s opponents weren’t much of a challenge for him. He’s fought and beaten the U.S. military in countless Hulk comics, so there wasn’t much suspense there. And a French poodle?
I could go on, but I think I’ve pointed out enough flaws to make my case. Still, if you liked the movie–and I mean this seriously–more power to you. Enjoy.
Regardless, this topic is about the relish and glee that some people are enjoying over the incorrect perception that the film failed. I hope these people are happy when the Hulk in Hulk 2 is a guy in a foam rubber suit and the script written by a committee.
Y’know, this may be sacrilege to some people, but Lou Ferrigno made a much more convincing Hulk than that green, pixelated…thing.
Doesn’t anyone remember the horrible Marvel based movies in the 70s and 80s? Is that what you want? What is wrong with supporting this rare boom in the genre? You can encourage it to get better without joyfully ripping the films to shreds. The SCHADENFREUDE is ugly at best.
Well, I avoided ripping it to shreds before, and you complained that no one had pointed out any flaws in the movie. From my perspective, noting that the Hulk movie was awful is encouraging the genre to get better. I prefer criticism to letting the filmmakers think everything’s all right.
Oh, and by the way, just because this movie isn’t as bad as the the worst comic book adaptations doesn’t mean it’s beyond criticism.
-Daniel M.
While I wasn’t happy with the movie, for more reasons than I want to go into here, I do want it to do well. I’ve seen it once in the theater, and I know I’m going to be buying the DVD when it comes out. (That way, I can skip over the parts I didn’t care for and watch the parts I love, like the Hulk Vs. Army in the desert.) If people asked me how I liked it, I told them, but then clarified that I come at the movie from a different point of view. Most people I know don’t know the comic history of the character, so they might love the film.
I do think that Ang Lee and James Schamus hurt the potential box office a little bit by making the film with such an unrelenting dark tone. I’ve had a few people with young kids ask me if they should go see it, and I’ve had to say no. Mostly on the basis of the dog attack and Bruce’s father.
As for my reactions, there were two main reasons the movie disappointed me. The first was that it was SO CLOSE to being the Hulk movie I’d wanted since I started reading Peter’s run on the comic. The elements were all there, but they just didn’t come together.
The other reason was the unforgivable one. In a Hulk movie, you have to have “the line”. You all know which one it is. “Don’t make me angry. You wouldn’t like me when I’m angry.” The Hulk game I bought for my computer (which has Eric Bana doing Bruce’s voice) has the line. Heck, even Dogma, a movie that has nothing to do with the Hulk has the line. Why the actual movie didn’t is something I can’t understand. And no, I don’t count the way it was done at the end because it was done as a subtitle. It would be like skipping the “With great power comes great responsibility” line in Spider-Man.
And don’t EVEN get me started on the mutated poodle.
With all that, I’m still looking forward to the eventual sequel. Ang Lee strikes me as a brilliant director, and I hope that he takes in some of what has been said by the loyal fans of the comic and uses that to make the next Hulk movie what we all wish it could be.
Here’s some bad news about the merchandising: http://www.thesun.co.uk//article/0,,2-2003310256,00.html
Hum…. am I the only one who cannot read the “bad news about the merchandising”????
James, somehow I’m picturing you in 1956, refusing to buy any issues of the Flash starring Barry Allen “on principle”…
Well, no. The difference is, you see, that that was an entirely different character with the same name. The Ultimate line is 1) being published at the same time as the current run, 2) rehashing stories that have already been told in the original run and 3) has the SAME characters as the current run.
I had no problem with What if… or , say, Age of Apocalypse but my beef with the Ultimate line is that if these characters can have such good stories told about them (as the general concensus appears to be) then why not tell these stories in the main line? The Ultimates looks phenomenal, yet the Avengers looks like it is treading water and has been for some time.
How about Marvel respecting the characters and not throwing them out with the bathwater.
“I hope you are all doing what I am, that is, not buying any Ultimate line comics out of principle.”
How about just enjoying a good story? Not buying Ultimates on principle is, to me, rather silly (feel free, though, it’s a free country). Revisioning can be a lot of fun.
As for the Hulk movie, it was in a tough situation. You guys seem to think it’s based on a comic book, but to most of the movie-going public it’s based on the television show. My wife loved the TV show, so the slow opening was fine with her (remember, there was no gamma bomb in the TV version). So Banner was loosely based on the TV show; Hulk on the comic (and CGI or not, I LOVED the Hulk stuff. You know, willing suspension of disbelief HAS to extend to CGI effects. I had a bigger problem with Lou and his ever-smearing bodypaint.)
Heck, be glad I didn’t write it. Banner wouldn’t have been emotionally repressed, he would have been a conflicted man with a hair-trigger temper, so when he’s irradiated, he HAS to change. Hulk would have been a natural disaster who may not have killed people intentionally, but scores would die anyway. Banner would “wake up” amidst the conflagration he caused and be terrified of losing his temper again… but it isn’t like temper is easy to control when you never have before… not to mention the physiological effects of anger is identical to passion or excitement (maybe giving the Hulk different aspects depending on transformation trigger…)
Yes, be very glad I didn’t write it…
Well, what I’ve really kinda been hoping would happen is that HULK would do enough business to at least make people want to see more, then FANTASTIC FOUR does good business. And then, if both movies are made by Universal (are they?) we get to see a big-screen treatment of a Hulk-Thing slugfest.
(Then again, I’m the only person I know planning to go see FREDDY VS. JASON.)
Unfortunately I am a bit late again but my husband and me, we only had the opportunity today to watch The Hulk movie.
I didn`t like it at all. The story was dragging terribly and the whole movie could easily have been compressed to half the time. The story was disjointed and although the split screens were effective sometimes, most of the times I found them annoying. The Hulk looked very artificial and the end left both of us wondering what this was all about.
I want to add, I have never been a Hulk fan and have only read very few comics of the series. I only know a bit about Hulk`s origin from German reprints I read many years ago. This modernized version worked for me, but with that I only mean the idea. The way it was handled dragged on much too long and I had the feeling that the writer/s of this movie wanted to make sure that absolutely everybody knows at the end what happened here: Therefore all these repeats and flashbacks. Unfortunately the trend is very strong in US television to underestimate the intelligence of the viewers and I felt that very strongly in places when watching this movie.
If the rest of the story and the characterizations are accurate when compared with the comic book series, I don`t know. I can only say that Betty and her father were convincing to me but the actor who played the Hulk didn`t leave a lasting impression. I found him quite bland.
I am not saying this with any feeling of Schadenfreude but I also think, another Hulk movie is not a good idea. Instead it makes much more sense to concentrate on the parts Marvel has to offer that were proven to be effective and successful: like X-Men and Spider-Man. I certainly would prefer another movie with these characters to the Hulk (or Daredevil). One problem is probably that many people I know, me included by the way, don`t see much potential or appeal in the Hulk. The movie certainly didn`t help to convince me otherwise.
This discussion reminds me a bit of the reactions after Nemesis, the latest Star Trek movie. I know that there are also people who liked it. To me, it is easily the worst Star Trek movie I ever had the misfortune to see. Instead of being annoyed and disappointed AGAIN when watching a TNG movie, it is better to concentrate on Enterprise. Like with another Hulk movie, I am not optimistic about another Star Trek movie either.
fbgfdhgfhxg