the CGI looks not much better than ang lee's hulk.

I just saw this, and I enjoyed it, but I liked Ang Lee's Hulk a lot more. I'll try watching his Hulk later and see if my opinion changes.

I'm giving this a 7/10. Just for the record I also think Iron Man was better.

This post has been edited by QuickFire: Jun 13 2008, 05:47 PM

which could explain why I liked Ang Lee's better... I have never read any of the hulk comics nor seen the tv series (in which the Lou Ferrigno hulk looks like crap to me from what little I've seen ).

btw how come I see many people bashing Ang Lee's movie because there wasn't enough action, when the second half of it was practically all action!?

and the new hulk, there is no action at all during the gap between the first major setpiece and the next, which lasted 40-45 minutes IINM. In fact I think Ang Lee's not only had more action, but better action as well.

---

Added on June 13, 2008, 11:00 pmI see many people saying the CGI is top-notch, but I found the CGI to be rather strange. The Hulk looked like some kind of hand painting. I much prefer the lime green CGI HUlk from 2003 than the dirt army green of this. I got the impression that they wanted to make Hulk dirtier, angrier and darker than the one before, and they proceeded to accomplish this by changing the colour, adding creases and wrinkles and spots and imperfections to the skin, and doubling or trippling the muscle definition. Oh and also making him constantly grimace. Hulk 2003 managed to express an array of emotions - anger, fear, fatigue, love and in some scenes you could see he's in peace (though never for long). Here, it's all anger. Perhaps this was the case in the comics, I dont know, but the fact is Hulk 03 was a lot more emotive.

I'm not sure why people didnt like how Hulk looked in the 03 film, was it the colour? or because his skin was smooth and human-like? In any case I thought the CGI looked better then. Here, I thought hulk looked a bit familiar, and I think I know why now.... he kinda looks like Boss Tanaka in the anime bit in Kill Bill vol.1, the bit where O-ren Ishi plunges the katana into his abdomen and we see him all angry and bearing his teeth (and eventually breaking them).

If you want to compare it with the best CGI monster ever created - Davy Jones - then this is a failure.

Does this look realistic to you? (yeah I know there isnt a walking 10ft green giant around, but you get what I mean)


This post has been edited by QuickFire: Jun 13 2008, 11:00 PM

glad I have someone to agree with! and he doesn't look like a midget, he is a midget.

oh yeah which reminds me, how come all the fanboys were so critical with hulk's variable sizes in 2003 but not with this one? correct me if I'm wrong, but doesnt banner turn into hulk when he's angry and not when he's excited? nor does he change when his heart rate goes up.

lol so basically you are saying hulk increasing in size as he gets angrier is okay too? hah tell that to the fanboys!

personally these things dont concern me, since I was never a fan of the comics anyway.

norton almost always carries an air of blandness around him anyway.... I mean he's okay, but he never excels past being just good except in one or two movies.

Watch Lee's Hulk again with a different mindset la. Dont expect a standard hollywood action blockbuster and you should at least find it pretty good.

I'm not gonna argue about norton. Try as he may he just cant shed that slight bit of blandness around him. Even in his best roles he has suspect acting moments, like at the end of AHX where he cries. That almost ruined the scene for me.

I'm not talking about the movie getting mauled by the critics here. I'm saying people should go watch it again in a different light, and not AS A SUMMER BLOCKBUSTER. Sometimes I wonder why people love Batman Begins and slate this. It's not a fun movie. There is hardly any fun in it. Perhaps its because batman has always been one of the darker and more serious of superheroes, while Hulk is the brainless all-fun-and-no-depth counterpart... so fans cant appreciate it when a director comes along and tries (and pretty successfully) gives it depth?

Iron Man's depth doesn't even skin the surface of Hulk. Look at Hulk as a good, complex drama with a comic book element. Iron Man for all it accomplishes is still very much a standard fun blockbuster ala Spiderman. It's still is very well done though, I'm not gonna take that away. Needed more action and it could have been great.

I think it wouldnt be fair to Hulk if we were to compare it to movies like Spiderman, X=Men, and Iron Man. Its just different from the usual popcorn fare. It made the mistake of coming out in the wrong season, being hyped for the wrong reasons, and being targeted at the wrong audience.

schumacher's batman and robin wasnt tongue in cheek fun, it was a total mess of a film! it didnt try to add anything to the franchise, it wasnt fun, it wasnt funny, it was just bad.

Hulk has its fun moments anyway. Hulk battering the tanks wasn't fun?

that can turn out to be one of the biggest compliments a movie can get you know....

yeah, it's little cool bits like this which I like. That bit alone for me is better than the end fight scene of the new hulk.

not to mention seeing hulk run out in the desert was freaking cool.

I must admit the jumping was bordering on flying though. mid-air Hulk would just kind of flap his arms like wings and he would magically gain an additional few kilometres. ROFL.

the jumping part is such an insignificant part of the movie, hardly worth any bother.