The Incredible Hulk

U

Ur best friend (Ab)

New member
Thought I'd take it upon my-bad-self to create a Thread dedicated to the Film as it's out this very week across the nation's cinemas.

Not seeing it until a week this Thursday myself, so sadly gonna be missing out on the Premiere. Gotta say though, after being absolutely blown away with Iron Man the other month, I'm totally stoked for seeing this Movie as it seems to be getting some great reviews all over the Net.

But yeah, if & when any of you guys see it, don't hesitate to whack up your righteous opinions of it right here folks! ^_^

EDIT: BTW - Indy 4 was a pile of festering dogshite.
 
I am looking forward to this movie as the last Hulk movie was an insult to the character, he looked too much like a cartoon for my liking.
 
I saw this film today and I was suprised at how violent it was for a 12A - that aside it's very entertaining thouh I'd give 'Iron Man' the slight edge.

Edward Norton was sympathetic as Bruce Banner and it was good to see a cameo from Lou Ferrigno as well as a posthumous one from Bill Bixby. Robert Downey Jr did make an appearance as Tony Stark but only in the last scene.

I was a bit unsure when I heard there was so much CGI but it was fine and Tim Roth is great as Blonsky :)
7/10
 
Enjoyed it, but have to admit that i definitely preferred Iron Man out of this years Marvel Studio's offerings. Edward Norton was a good choice for Banner, and Tim Roth was excellent. My only gripe was with the SFX, they just didn't seem convincing at all in close ups, although the final street battle was brilliant. Great film though, probably a 8.5/10 from me.
 
I saw it before I really like Nortons other work an he was superb in this comic book film ..

I liked the in jokes in the film too, wont repeat them but they were quite funny , an on the whole for someone who doesnt like Superhero type films , Ill give it 7/10 for Norton ,

Im afraid poor old Tim Roth let the side down in this , an I was loling at him in the US Army Uniform ,lol
 
Well I get to see staff screening tomorrow, so I will report back with my findings, I have a feeling it won't be as good as Iron Man however!
 
As a fan of the TV series this film is a no-no for me simply because it has failed to learn any lessons from the 2003 version - namely that it continues to have a CGI Hulk instead of an actor playing him. Also, the TV series was more psychological and less "comic book" than the original Marvel character, which is why the series had such a broad appeal.
 
Yes I liked Ang Lee's version to. Can't quiet get why it was so hated.


The new version with Ed Norton sure looks good though.
 
Theres no way you could do a convincing hulk not in CGI...
I hate the way people blame CGI for poor movies.

A convincing Hulk for todays generation wouldnt be able to be achieved by costume.

I think your just too stuck in the past.
 
SlashNX
Excellent reply .. too GH Online ....:)

I would add too,
GH Online
I liked Nortons references too the tv show it was way above the call of duty , in some scenes I thought I was watching Bill Bixby,
 
ed norton hasn't done any press for it as he has fallen out with marvel - by all accounts he doesn't like the finished film, and first reviews are average at best :(((
 
How do you reach that conclusion when our paths have crossed just twice on this forum? I have a great interest in TV station idents and without CGI many of the current BBC1 symbols could not have been effectively realised - the Christmas penguins being a case in point.

But just because CGI is available as an option doesn't mean it's always the best. It could be combined with good old make up for example, see the earlier example I quoted from Heroes - and if you remade the Hulk TV series now it could make Lou Ferrigno appear much bigger than he actually was.

Back the the subject of station idents, your theory works both ways in that FX we think may be achieved by computers are still sometimes achieved the hard way - on S4C for example, the golf buggies which appear to be moving along by themselves were actually towed along by stage-hanRAB on strong wires - and the wires "airbrushed out" in post production.
 
SlashNX? You've certainly done a hatchet job on me.

Why could a convincing Hulk not be achieved by an actor? Lou Ferrigno managed it with all of the constraints of 1970s SFX he had to work with. The problem with the last CGI Hulk is that his movement was too jerky and clunky, as you would expect with a CGI image, and from what I've seen of the new version little has changed. This turns the Hulk from the fearsome creature he is meant to be into a camp, Doctor Who-like monster.

And I make no apologies for being stuck in the past. Even Heroes still does some of its SFX the old way - namely the various "stages" of Claire's regeneration after emerging from an exploding building. Like the "stages" of David Banner's transformation these were in part achieved with make-up alone.
 
Back
Top