Interweb? I’m sure I’ve heard that line somewhere and just felt like using it. Maybe because I’m in a sort of comical mood after watching the first released trailer forThe Incredible Hulk, the latest superhero movie that hits theaters on June 13th.
I honestly am torn by it. The first half of it looked pretty interesting, but then it degrades into a Hulk clone that appears to be half fish, and then a total rip off of the Matrix: Revolutions showdown between Neo and Agent Smith. You know the scene, when they face each other on a rainy street, then run like heck towards each other and start exchanging blows, with a million other Smiths watching on the streets.
Well, the end of this new trailer for Hulk pretty much does the same thing, minus the rain and the Andersons are instead normal humans running for their lives.
Granted, people running at each other and fighting isn’t “owned” by Neo and Agent Smith but it still feels like something I’ve seen too many times. Gimme something unique!
The other downside is that I really feel like we have the entire story already told to us. Edward Norton is the Hulk, he wants to get rid of it, the army wants to lock him up, he runs, Tim Roth becomes Hulk Fish, and then Norton decides that maybe he can control it and they fight.
The bonus though is that Liv Tyler is in it. Perhaps with her and Norton, this movie can actually turn out to be great, but this trailer for some reason just didn’t do it for me like some others this year, like Iron Man, or Indiana Jones.
What do you guys think? Am I out of my mind? Should I be pumped?
Watch it below, or visit MovieWeb for those without Flash 9.
Wow. You pretty much summed up my feelings on it too.
I’ve felt pretty bad for poor Eric Bana who did a fantastic job as Bruce Banner in a movie that just wasn’t very good and seemed to have shouldered some blame that wasn’t his. I understand why Marvel wanted to reboot after that flick and go another way, but wasn’t sure it was fair not to give Bana another shot. Seeing the beginning of this though, I think they were right. Instead of a sullen and mopey Banner, Norton’s playing him a little wide eyed which I like a lot.
The military on Banner’s tail is great. I do wish they’d shown us Tony Stark just to get the Avengers juice flowing, but I guess they want to hold on to that for the film itself. So far so good.
And then…we get a pretty ridiculous looking Abomination and a very derivative fight scene – good call on it looking like The Matrix. So…maybe a B or B+. And this is the trailer Ed Norton’s happy with. That doesn’t bode well, I fear.
R.A. Porter’s last blog post..How they got here: Winnie’s Cameltoe?
Without being into The Hulk, I assume Abomination is an evil character in the comics that he faces? Was Abomination supposed to look like a Hulk with gills?
I agree, I LIKED Eric Bana…it was the movie itself, the writing or something, that made it less than stellar, not Bana.
Not with gills. He should look more reptilian, like this: http://www.hulklibrary.com/hulk/images/characters/abom-l.jpg
R.A. Porter’s last blog post..How they got here: Winnie’s Cameltoe?
The problem with this Hulk movie will be the same as the last Hulk movie…making the Hulk himself not appear ridiculous. It still looks almost too computer generated, though. That’s a bad thing. Everything else looks pretty cool.
It’s the HULK. It’s a huge green monster with a bad temper. Then again, it’s possible that the CGI is not finished yet like the first Iron Man trailer.
I think this flick’s main problems are the bad taste that Hulk left in our mouths and that we have seen so much of The Dark Knight and Iron Man (both of which look like they could be the best “comic book” movies ever made) that this flick has a lot to live up to. BUT, it does have Edward Norton, Liv Tyler, Tim Roth and William Hurt and (hopefully) no esoteric flashbacks and imagery.
Steven’s last blog post..Top 100 Movies: No. 68 – The People vs. Larry Flynt (1996)
I’m with ya, Jason. The CGI just looks, well, CGI-y.
I’m a little stunned that actors of Ed Norton, Tim Roth, & Bill Hurt’s calibers would even do this movie. At best, it’ll probably be a visually-exciting, brain-dead, effects-laden slugfest with some cool explosions. More likely, it’ll probably just be a Bruckheimer-esqe crapfest.
Hollywood keeps trying to mine comic books for film fodder. They need to pay attention to the dismal failures that most of these have been. Most are total tripe. Fantastic Four, anyone?
I agree, Rob. But the only thing that really gives me hope about this film is the fact that it does have Ed Norton and Tim Roth and William Hurt. Ed Norton is notorious for his desire to make good films. I just can’t see him signing up to make crap or standing by while the film turns into crap (indeed, there’s already talk of a fight between him and others over the cut of the film). I don’t know why he thought it would be a good idea, but I’m almost willing to give it the benefit of the doubt simply because Norton is in it.
LOL Hulk fish… the Cap’n is glad you changed it to Abomination finally… I on the other hand thinks this looks great. everyone complained the first one was too much story, too much setup, not enough action. This will be a (in the voice of Chris Berman) rumblin stumblin knockdown for 95 yards TD!!! The cast is gonna make this movie, and I bet everyone will love this… how can anyone shoot this down based on this trailer… Rambo IV I get, but not on this one…
I think everyone is thinking negatively about this Hulk, because the first one was so poorly constructed. It sort of tainted the whole idea of making more, similiar to Afflec’s Daredevil, although I do like several parts of Daredevil, except when everyone develops the ability to fly. That was more than dumb. Anyway, I know I will watch it because I enjoy comic movies. There is a group of people, and I’m guessing we r all included, who will either go to the theater or rent almost every comic movie made. So, it can’t fail too much.
I think the first movie attempted to create something special with their “Hulk” film, and by casting Eric Bana and Jennifer Connelly I thought they might have something, but mysteriously it fell short. I think the problem was part plot, part special effects/CGI which seemed too cartoon like and unbelievable, but the acting was good for the most part. To contrast that with a successful comic book film around that same time period, “Batman Returns” tried the same idea and it worked, using creative and serious actors cast in a special effects laden comic book story. It is the same formula. So why would this new “Hulk” film be different? Again they are using serious actors, Tim Roth, Edward Norton and I am sure it will have many special effects, but I don’t know if it will be more successful then the “Dark Knight” when it comes out. They would have to figure out what went wrong with the last “Hulk” film, fix it and then go beyond that to try to make up for what was wrong in the first film, because I don’t think there would be any other way to change people’s minds about the “Hulk” franchise.
Raven Spinner’s last blog post..Rascal
Well, I think you’re right. I don’t think they’ll have a problem fixing what was wrong with the last one (at least I hope not – the CGI in the trailer is iffy), but I don’t know how they’re going to go above and beyond to really turn people into Hulk fans. It’s going to be a massive challenge for them especially with Iron Man and The Dark Knight coming out.
The problem is with Hulk himself. The first film had great actors doing a really good job. Then, there was this giant green hulking monster smashing things. He didn’t smash enough things to be fun and comic-booky, but he wasn’t absent from the movie enough for it to be a character study about a tortured scientist. This movie looks to have the same problem.
Contrast to Batman Begins or The Dark Knight or even Iron Man, where you’ve got the first ingredient the same as the Hulk movies – great actors doing bang up work as civilians – *plus* you’ve got heroes that don’t look silly. They talk, they menace, they taunt, they aren’t just balls of rage smashing things.
Fundamentally, I think a Hulk movie could only really succeed by embracing its comic book self, ditching most of the “Banner wants to cure himself” story, and just having a lot of “Hulk Smash!”
R.A. Porter’s last blog post..How they got here: Winnie’s Cameltoe?
Yeah, the problem may lie in the fact the hero himself is CGI totally, and not a real life actor.
I think it’s cool that he looks true to his comic form, giant, huge, etc., but it probably causes a disconnect between the audience and the character.
I think you guys are over-analyzing this movie, much like Ang Lee did with the first Hulk movie. This is (unbelievably) the first trailer for the movie and the special effects might not even be complete. Plus, and I’m not a big Hulk fan, but wasn’t a lot of the comic book story about Banner wanting to cure himself? I think you can have both Banner’s inner turmoil and “Hulk Smash!”
I have some faith in the actors here and think we may all be in for a pleasant surprise.
Steven’s last blog post..That’s What She Said . . . II
[...] Incredible Hulk (June 13, 2008) – I know some are concerned about this flick. I think they are in for a pleasant [...]
I know I’m alone on this, and I will admit in public that I liked the last Hulk movie. I just pretended it had nothing to do with the original story. True, the animation was pretty fake looking, and there were some plot issues. I still enjoyed it.
Tim E.’s last blog post..Red Deer & Central Alberta Road Conditions Mar. 16/08
Tim…that is a horrible mistake on my part, fdl!
Thanks for the heads up…and way to have the cajones to say you liked that movie in public