|
Hulk
Director: Ang Lee
Starring: Eric Bana, Jennifer Connelly, Nick Nolte, Sam Elliot, Josh Lucas
The Incredible Hulk
Director: Louis Leterrier
Starring: Edward Norton, Liv Tyler, Tim Roth, William Hurt, Tim Blake Nelson  As you might have guessed, I have seen the new Hulk movie. Now I was planning to review the film on its own, but I decided the best way to review the new film is to put it toe-to-toe with its earlier counterpart. This is because, somewhat annoyingly, both have their strengths and weaknesses. Now, first, I must explain that I am not a comic book guy, so this is more of a review for the casual crowd. In a way, that's best, since I probably won't get too over-excited over the upcoming Avengers movie that I forget to mention anything else. (I should mention that might be a hard sell in England, since when someone says The Avengers, I, like most Brits, think Emma Peel and John Steed in 60s England - and not the Hollywood bastardized version either). This may also mean I probably won't crucify the filmmakers for not translating the comic book exactly. In 2003's Hulk, Bruce Banner (Eric Bana) works as a shut-off scientist who has frequent nightmares and lives blissfully unaware of the DNA tinkering of his father (Nick Nolte). When an experiment with his ex-girlfriend/scientist Betty Ross (Jennifer Connelly) goes wrong, Bruce eventually turns into a Hulk that Betty's military father (Sam Elliot) has to stop. Also, there's some man who wants to use the Hulk's powers for personal gain (Josh Lucas). In 2008's The Incredible Hulk, Bruce Banner has spent 5 years in Brazil after an experiment by General Ross (William Hurt) injures Bruce's girlfriend Betty (Liv Tyler). After the Government track him down, they send a crack team, including English-Russian Emil Blonsky (Tim Roth), to capture him. That mission goes wrong, and the military pursue Banner further - but Emil also wants the power that Banner's alter-ego possesses. When I first got a news about Universal re-booting the Hulk franchise, I wasn't so sure if this was a good thing, if I am totally honest. As I seem the remember, the first Hulk wasn't that bad, besides being overlong (however a recap by bad movie website The Agony Booth and a recent viewing by me opened up a whole new can of worms) and given that it was so recent in people's memories, I wondered if a reboot might be a bit troublesome. While some of my fears were calmed, I still think The Incredible Hulk is flawed, but in different ways. Both films have a different tone. Hulk is a much more serious look at the character, which does seem to take more interest in the relationships between the characters than it does of the benemoth of the title. This should really have been expected of Ang Lee, given that he directed Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, but the film's advertising campaign was poor and mis-sold the film has 110% slam-bang action, which revealed what the studio really wanted out of the film. Although this tone is interesting, there is a sense of pretention to the film like it feels somehow above the material. This can be seen by the repeated attempts to be deep with such silly material. The Incredible Hulk solves this by making the film more about the big green creature and delivering wall-to-wall action, particualrly in the second half. The Incredible Hulk also has a sense of humour, which autopsies found none of the first movie (in fact, I did laugh a fair bit - all intentional) and is more relatable to a general audience. I did feel, however, that the new film didn't explore Bruce Banner as a person as much as I liked, but then again, that was some of the reason why the first Hulk failed - it spent too much time with Banner. In terms of characters and actors, both get an equal amount of kudos. Eric Bana, I felt, was better as Bruce Banner than Norton, but then again, as I said before, Bana had much more material than Norton. That's not say Norton doesn't do a good job, however, making Banner very likable and believable in the situation. Bana's part in the first one was quite a subtle performance, with the idea of this anger bubbling under the surface that isn't in Norton's performance. In terms of Betty Ross, the comparison becomes harder because they are both different takes on the same character. Connelly's Betty was quite a hard woman, whose exterior did hide a frailty underneath it all. Tyler's Betty is a lot more warm and maternal, particularly when it comes to her scenes with the Hulk. I prefered Tyler's performance because it seemed much more suited to the role than Connelly's. The comparison is simialrly hard when it comes to General Ross, since again they are very different portrayals. Elliot's is much more fatherly, a man torn between his job and his role as a father. Hurt is a man for whom career comes first, and has absolutely no idea how to be a father. I'd say this a draw since both are very good but radically different performances from two legendary character actors. There isn't very much to compare between them. Finally, we come to the villian. Tim Roth is far better than Nick Nolte's mental daddo. Nolte's turn is about as wild as his hair, which presumably needs its own tamer (also, the hair was the reason behind that infamous mugshot) and when Nolte goes ballistic in his last scene, Nolte overdoes it to the point of hilarity - I laughed, and that time it wasn't intentional. Roth does well as the bad guy, up until his CGI alter-ego steps in (more on that later), with an underlying sense of menace to his performance. As the movie progresses, Emil becomes more unstable, and this is reflected well in the performance.  When it comes to action stakes, The Incredible Hulk beats the earlier movie hands down. That's no understatement, though. What people forget about Hulk is that once the seemingly-endless talking stops, the action was pretty wild. The Incredible Hulk, however, amps it up by a factor of ten. The action scenes with the Hulk are hard, fast, frantic and loud. Very loud. So loud I checked my ears several times to make sure they weren't bleeding. They are very entertaining, though. It was particularly fun to see the Hulk using objects around him, be it a makeshift shield or a pair of knuckles made out of two ends of a car. That said, sometimes these sequences go too far: sticking in my mind is the moment where two jeeps use concentrated sound waves against the Hulk. What the heck? Both films have pacing issues. Hulk has a very slow first act, and while one needs some build-up towards the big guy's appearance, it takes 45 minutes for Bruce to first turn green. And this is with PAL speed-up. (films run slightly faster here due to TV systems) Until then, we get these attempts to be deep, but they fail due to the fact that the source material doesn't hold up to that much scrutiny and not for that long. The Incredible Hulk goes completely the other way and doesn't give enough downtime between the action sequences, which does feel like the studio has been trying to get the film in under 2 hours. I noticed that the "see a shrink" scene in the teaser trailer is absent and was disappointed that the kick Blonsky is given by the Hulk as seen in the trailer has been toned down in the final version. I've heard Edward Norton is refusing to promote the film because he is unhappy with the Theatrical Cut - and this does come across in the final product. Expect an extended version on DVD. Also, the action sequences are one area where The Incredible Hulk is actually darker than the earlier movie - whereas Hulk took pains to stress that no one is injured by the Hulk (even when he throws a tank full of people several miles), The Incredible Hulk has a number of Hulk-related fatalities, noticably in the Hulk's first action sequence. I was pleased with this, as it makes more sense for Bruce to want to contain it since the fact it causes harm is an affirmative rather than just in theory. The script in The Incredible Hulk is much better than in Hulk, which at its worst was pretentious, meandering and even downright stupid. Bruce's father, at the end of the movie, has a very poor logic for doing what he does. Why does Josh Lucas persist on attacking the Hulk with a broken leg? What the heck was Betty's dream all about? The Incredible Hulk has a more linear narrative and is thus more successful, with characters given decent reasons for their decisions. If I had to mention a flaw, it would be that I grimaced at the several on-the-nose lines that were incredibly corny. ("You could become... an abombination!") This isn't helped by the delivery of these lines either, which are overplayed too. The special effects, I felt, were far better in Hulk. There Hulk actually looked fairly realistic, with a pleasing skin texture and a certain resemblance to Eric Bana. The Incredible Hulk actually has worse effects than the last movie. Let me repeat that: the effects are worse than the last movie. This is really bad considering the last one was 5 years ago. The Hulk looks cartoony, which certainly doesn't help the "giant Shrek" argument.I know it is meant to look like how he looks on the page, but that does not translate to the screen well at all. It doesn't help either than the Hulk bears no resemblance to Edward Norton. The eventual appearance of Abombination is a similar disappointment, looking like a more bonier version of Imhotep out of The Mummy. They both look like they stepped out of the Playstation 3 tie-in game. They're just above the disappointing Darkseekers out I Am Legend. The climaxes are weak points for both films. The finale for the Hulk makes no sense on a logical level because the reason behind it is dubious and it takes place in glorious dark-o-vision, where I can't see what the hell is going on. The Incredible Hulk's final fight is a well-shot action sequence, but due to the lackluster special effects, it looks like you're watching a video game in action. The ending to the fight is nonsensical and is just plain preposterous. It was a shame, since the film was fairly strong until that point. The ending is redeemed by a surprise cameo - you may already know who it is, but for those who don't, I won't spoil it for you. At the end of the day, Hulk is an interesting mess of bits that are good and bits of it that are bad. Unfortunately, due to a bloated running time and the pretention, it comes up sadly short. The Incredible Hulk is a superior film, despite my worries, but still has flaws of its own, some of which may have been down to studio interference. Still, I advise you catch The Incredible Hulk, and do so on a big screen, since it is a decent piece of summer entertainment that needs to be seen big and loud. Hulk: 3/5 The Incredible Hulk: 3.5/5
 |
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Show/Hide comments
Show/Hide comment form
One more thing I noticed is that, in the "climax" where Hulk turns around and starts beating Abomination (*Gasp*! No one saw THAT coming!!) he grows about 2 feet and looks like he stopped the fight, worked out for two years, and stepped back in.
But the new version was MUCH better, and I think Norton was a way better Bruce than Bana... I can't wait for the Avengers movie and (if they decide so) Incredible Hulk 2.