Comments on: Was Ang Lee’s Hulk Better than Leterrier’s After All?

By: Eugene

Eugene — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 18:23:35 +0000

The Ang Lee version did a better job at showcasing the Hulk’s powers. The first movie showed his 1.Strength 2.Speed 3.Leaping abilty. They both had the Hulk’s dialouge limited…”Puny Human.” in the first film and “Hulk Smash!” in the second movie. He came off as King Kong in the second movie. I like the way he looked in the first movie. 90’s buzz cut Hulk in the 1st film and late 70’s early 80’s Hulk in the 2nd film. Overall I prefer the 1st film. He really looked fake in the second film. Actually, there was more fights in the first movie. Dog fight, Miltary fight, fight with dad at the end. Which ever movie you prefer, enjoy it.

By: SeeL

SeeL — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 22:48:19 +0000

Hi Mark.

For the first time you write a comment, you are writing the total truth.
I agree 100%. Nothing more to say.

Keep writing bro.

SeeL

By: mark

mark — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:49:21 +0000

I do not get this at all. Ang Lee’s Hulk was better. I can not even go so far as to say they are equal as this gives incredible more credit than it deserves. I don’t know why people did not like the first one. My 18 year old likes to go around saying I was “the only one who liked it”. I am a fan of all four stars in both films though will give an edge to Jennifer as far as looks and sex appeal goes. Special effects and comic book style in the first film made it better than the second. I base these comments on the fact that I grew up reading these comics as they were all we had, so I feel qualified to speak on the subject. I never post or comment, but had to in this case. If they needed to make the second Hulk to build the case for the new Ironman/Hulk sequel, they could have used the old movie and saved the trouble.

Again, I just don’t get it.

By: SeeL

SeeL — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 00:47:21 +0000

I liked the Ang Lee Version better. I have to say, that i liked it from the beginning.. I dont know what the problems with the version were..OK new story, but what is wrong with that? For me as an instant fan, it was completly surprising..
And here my question for the fans of comic book adaptations..

When was the last time, you were surprised by an adaptation? Come on, lets face the truth..every 45 minutes of a comic book movie is for me and all comic book fans the same..Same story, different style and boring, because of knowing how everything happens.

This is MOVIE, a little difference never harm anyone..even the bad ones.

Keep in Mind..Only the new things, are the things we wanted to hear,see and know..So keep rollin’ Hollywood..We Fans are still here discussing and watching it!!!

By: Ben Burton

Ben Burton — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 13:40:29 +0000

Ang Lees take was slow and tiring, where Incredible was incredible, more connected to the comic and rampaging hulk, nice additions and mentions with the super soldier formula, abomination, the leader (sameul sterns) sheild and tony stark, and had a very nice looking and sounding rampaging hulk, no stupid gamma dogs or banners evil father, had the villians we wanted and the hulk we wanted

By: Spivey

Spivey — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 22:39:31 +0000

bye the way…hulk was different sizes at different times. It was relevant to his anger. Do your homework.

By: Spivey

Spivey — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 22:37:30 +0000

The new hulk is brainless…along with anti-fans of the first movie. I mean come on. Watch them side by side. Ego maniac norton is a joke…totally unbelieveable. Did anybody actually feel like he was angry? what a joke. And what quality did the new movie bring that you cant get from a video game. There was NOTHING creative about it. It was completely flat. People that hate it, just dont know how to watch a movie. Im glad the new one didnt make money. They would have been better off continueing what ang lee started and make a good movie. an eric banaless hulk, is no hulk at all.

By: Metabug

Metabug — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 09:50:05 +0000

I like Ang Lee’s version better, even though I wouldn’t go as far as to say I love it, I can appreciate the fact that they were courageous in trying many things new and unconventional, some worked for me, while others fall short. Also I am more tolerant towards slow-pacing movies than others I know.

There’s nothing great I can say about this new one, it’s entertaining but completely forgettable. They played everything safe (rumor is Ed Norton’s preferred cut suppose to have more plot, I wish that cut would be released as a special DVD edition). Even the “hulk smash” action sequences that supposed to be the main attraction of this one came off completely unoriginal and tame, comparing to the recent comic book Hulk I am familiar with. I still recommanded all my friends to see it in theaters, because I don’t think it would look as good on small screens.

As for someone mentioning how the hulk in Ang Lee’s version has un-proportional sizes across different scenes, that was intentional and true to certain versions of the comic, where hulk grow in size and strength proportional to his rage. In fact in term of origin story Ang Lee’s version is more true to the comic than this new one.

By: Tom

Tom — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 06:36:33 +0000

The new version was much better since it wasnt boring and kept me awake. The old version had hulk at un-proportionate size through out the movie. He started to grow bigger at different scene, like how he was as big as a plane in one scene and then only be double your height in the next.

The reason for it not being so profitable may be cause by boot leg movie online. Since it has become so much easier to watch it without paying for it.

By: Larry

Larry — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 12:38:31 +0000

I haven’t seen the entire Ang Lee film now have I seen the new one. What I did see of the Ang Lee was this really horrible and ludicris action scene where it appears you’re playing a video game. Hulk is trying to escape some horribly fake helicopters while seemingly gliding across the desert with some of the most boring action movie score I’ve ever seen. Just awful.

By: ek

ek — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 11:21:26 +0000

Ang lee Hulk’s, Story wise is MUCH better. This new hulk, don’t see a good story , heck , there is no story, just Hulk smash things.

By: joergn

joergn — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 06:26:50 +0000

Poor Ang Lee-fanboys, they don´t stand the truth. Ang Lee´s “Hulk” was crap, ´cause he wasn´t the right director for this project to start with. The Hulk-comics were about Action, collateral damage, the “Hulk smash”-moments. Letterier knew that and made a faithful and fun adaption of the books. And “Incredible Hulk” will make more money at the end, it just started overseas and will make a heck more bucks if it comes out on DVD. Eat this, Letterier-haters!

By: Harosa

Harosa — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 03:37:47 +0000

The reason this one might not have done as well as the first one was because Lee’s version was still in everyone’s head, i think true fans of the Hulk will agree this was a better movie and it had ot overcome a bigger bias, the last Hulk rode the original trend of comic book adaptations, this one, despite Iron Man’s success is coming at the tail end of these franchises dying down.

By: Brad L. Wooldridge

Brad L. Wooldridge — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 23:27:32 +0000

“The Incredible Hulk” WAS better than “Hulk.” It was a much more entertaining and exciting film than the first one. Everything about it was better, in my opinion. Now, having said that, the second one did not do the “Iron Man”-like business Marvel was hoping for, but it’s still a huge profit for them (Marvel).

I don’t know about eating crow. So what if this one didn’t perform as well as it was hoped too. I’m just glad they finally made a good movie about the Hulk…one that I’ll watch more than once, too.