The Incredible Hulk

A unique cast versus primitively crafted characters at the level of 2D PC games. Blockbuster ambitions versus B-movie clichés. Straight-faced tacky stylization and fetishized straightforward and self-serving militaristic action. Simply put, The Incredible Hulk is a “completely new level of weird”, or an entertaining guilty pleasure worthy of the Golden Raspberry Award for the worst movie of the year. (07/19/2008)

Bruce Banner would have be pleased with this approach. Occasionally he would have been so enthusiastic about it that he would purr like a little baby at his mother’s breast. And in some places he would be so pissed with it that his elastic pants would get too small even for his alter ego. The Incredible Hulk is an amazing joy ride along a sinusoid graph. Nah, I’m kidding. About the sinusoid graph. While at some points and in some scenes it works even better than Ang Lee’s version, as a whole it is a ride half-way to nowhere. Lee’s adaptation is more “Banneresque", while Leterrier’s version is unequivocally “Hulky". How significant. It’s up to you which you like best. I’m reminded of Marvel’s first movie attempt - Iron Man. In that movie, the juice like the style and the actors worked well, but the action element, the finale and even the villain was rather subdued. Here it’s almost precisely the other way round. The villain and the action are ok (but still no miracle), but the rest is just a bit wishy-washy. For instance sparks fly between Norton and Tyler as they would in a microwave oven during a power blackout. Paradoxically it works more at the moments when he appears in that miserable CGI guise. And the movie is rather lifeless in comparison with Iron Man. No jokes, no snappy comebacks (all hail a couple of exceptions). But I’m not saying it’s bad. In the end we have two good genre movies in place of one great one. But, as the ending hints, there’s a lot more in store (and we’ll probably see it soon). Oh, and one more criticism. I would probably rather have seen Liv’s bare chest rather than Norton’s. So fans of America’s substitute for their missing mythology will have a reason to be happy. The rest of us have another quality picture in front of us to join the rather thin ranks of colorfully saucy comic book movies. Somehow, right now I feel like watching a classic version of Jekyll and Hyde... (06/19/2008)

I still don’ t understand why there made an incomprehensible remake of a fairly new movie when it was already clear in advance that it would turn out more or less the same. Hulk doesn't have a good story and doesn't have that potential, he’s too serious and dramatic for a comic book hero. Technically, it's the same as with the previous film: impressive overall, but unfinished in the details. Tim Roth adds the necessary spice to it, Liv Tyler is an ornament (classic), and Edward Norton with his worried face also doesn't interest much. At least the opening credits made a proper “upgrade” and, with it’s solid orchestral accompaniment, it is one of the few captivating things you will see in the movie. (09/28/2008)

Early on, Leterrier blows Lee’s work away during the opening credits, but that's where the positives in relation to the previous film end. That there are only three action scenes in two hours doesn’t bother me so much given that even without the Hulk's fights with the army, there is still something going on and it's solidly paced. However, Leterrier's forte is contact fights in an arena or in mafia dens. In the bigger scenes, he desperately steals wherever he can think of, meaning that the opening is "Bourne Morocco," the university ambush replicates Ang's tanks from the desert, and the ending is all about CGI battles. The rest is horribly sterile so that the fated love fizzles out and the viewer shakes his head sadly. But I’m quite curious to see if the team offered at the end will really actually happen. (09/19/2008)

Compared to Lee's Hulk, this one is filmed without a shred of an idea. The story unfolds in the style of "action - boredom - more action - boredom - a bit of suspense before the ending - boredom - final overstuffed mega-action". Of all the characters, I liked the villain Blonsky the most (I can take Tim Roth anywhere, anytime, especially when he plays a madman), and that probably wasn't the intention either. Letterier wants to impress mainly with the digital effects, but they are not very good, and at the end he piles so many on top of each other that it's unbearable, the unsympathetic Edward Norton has one facial expression throughout the film and Liv Tyler has two. But above all, it is sorely lacking in perspective! Everything is presented with such awkward seriousness... It was simply terrible. (09/09/2009)