Man, that trailer looks AWESOME. This new Hulk looks like a lean mean fighting machine.
But is it a continuation of the first film? I read that Banna, Connely, and Shepard didn’t want to do the sequel, so that makes me wonder if it’s a completely new story/beginning.
I thinking (hoping) that the back-story will have already been laid in the first Hulk. It wasn’t that long ago so should be fresh in peoples minds (those who didnt try hard to forget it anyway).
This looks like its getting straight to the nitty gritty like Spiderman 2 did.
Abomination looks badass
[quote]Love2Lift wrote:
Man, that trailer looks AWESOME. This new Hulk looks like a lean mean fighting machine.
But is it a continuation of the first film? I read that Banna, Connely, and Shepard didn’t want to do the sequel, so that makes me wonder if it’s a completely new story/beginning. [/quote]
The house in the trailer is the same house in the first movie. My guess is, they are using the new lead inorder to get the audience to accept this as a different TYPE of movie. The director is the one from The Transporter.
[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
I’d have thought they would have figured it out long before Terminator 3. 
[/quote]
They should have figured it out after Jaws. The less you show the monster, the more sinister it seems. But if there is one thing you can count on, it’s that every producer in Hollywood has the memory and attention span of a Hamster.
This movie is and isn’t a new beginning because they aren’t bothering with the origin of the hulk and just starting the movie off with Banner running from the military, which means the only thing they are keeping from the first movie is that he became the hulk then.
[quote]BWBurner wrote:
you are correct. in the comics, the abomination was a russian creation in trying to make their “hulk”, but it went wrong. Int his movie they are making the abomination an american soldier.
[/quote]
So, the underlying message is that American soldiers are the bad-guys???
I really don`t understand that
I would guess that if you wanted to take an underlying message similar to that that it would be “turning everything into weapons to kill eachother with” is bad.
[quote]cremaster wrote:
BWBurner wrote:
you are correct. in the comics, the abomination was a russian creation in trying to make their “hulk”, but it went wrong. Int his movie they are making the abomination an american soldier.
So, the underlying message is that American soldiers are the bad-guys???
I really don`t understand that[/quote]
Why is it that if any movie portrays any armed service member as a bad guy, someone acts like the message is that all military are bad? One of the main characters in that comic for years, the infamous General Ross, is military and is not portrayed as anything other than a good soldier and a good leader.
I don’t understand how you even formed this thought in your head.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I don’t understand how you even formed this thought in your head.[/quote]
Because people like to look way too far into things and try to make something that isn’t there become a huge issue.
I think it’s like poetry. They always say that the poet is trying to convey something with the words he uses. For example, e.e. cummings writes about a car in one of his poems. However, “experts” say that he’s not really talking about a car, but a woman. This is similar to most poems where they say one thing but seem to be talking about something else.
Why don’t people just take it for what it is and stop trying to turn it into something else? It’s too easy to take anything and turn it into something else, but it doesn’t make it right.
Besides, we’re talking about a freakin’ movie made after a comic book story. Go see it and enjoy it.
i just watched the trailer and it made me want to lift weights
I would like to do naughty things to Liv Tyler.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
cremaster wrote:
BWBurner wrote:
you are correct. in the comics, the abomination was a russian creation in trying to make their “hulk”, but it went wrong. Int his movie they are making the abomination an american soldier.
So, the underlying message is that American soldiers are the bad-guys???
I really don`t understand that
Why is it that if any movie portrays any armed service member as a bad guy, someone acts like the message is that all military are bad? One of the main characters in that comic for years, the infamous General Ross, is military and is not portrayed as anything other than a good soldier and a good leader.
I don’t understand how you even formed this thought in your head.[/quote]
Maybe I didn`t explain my thought well.
The original (comic book) bad guy was a Russian soldier. I`m guessing the comic was written during the cold war.
Now, in the movie, since the Russians are our allies (more or less), they need to update the bad guys origin.
What I dont understand is why they made the bad guy an American soldier. Doesnt America have ANY enemies in the world?
[quote]cremaster wrote:
Professor X wrote:
cremaster wrote:
BWBurner wrote:
you are correct. in the comics, the abomination was a russian creation in trying to make their “hulk”, but it went wrong. Int his movie they are making the abomination an american soldier.
So, the underlying message is that American soldiers are the bad-guys???
I really don`t understand that
Why is it that if any movie portrays any armed service member as a bad guy, someone acts like the message is that all military are bad? One of the main characters in that comic for years, the infamous General Ross, is military and is not portrayed as anything other than a good soldier and a good leader.
I don’t understand how you even formed this thought in your head.
Maybe I didn`t explain my thought well.
The original (comic book) bad guy was a Russian soldier. I`m guessing the comic was written during the cold war.
Now, in the movie, since the Russians are our allies (more or less), they need to update the bad guys origin.
What I dont understand is why they made the bad guy an American soldier. Doesnt America have ANY enemies in the world?
[/quote]
Like I already wrote in this thread, the plot looks extremely similar to the video game so this isn’t new. I think it makes even less sense to make the guy Muslim extremist.
So, anyone else seen it yet?
I saw it last night and thought it was pretty cool. Lots of action, smashing shit up, even using a police car as a pair of boxing gloves!
The Hulk still looks pretty fake (I mean, apart from being a giant, green behemoth), I thought Ed Norton was decent as Banner, Liv Tyler was hot (no surprise) and Tim Roth was decent as well…
The usual cameo from Stan Lee was funny and there was also a great cameo from Lou Ferrigno.
Definitely worth seeing on the big screen!
Seen it. Loved it. Lots of action, CGI muscle flexxing looked convincing and a little “suprise at the end”
Yeah.
It was nice of them to put that little surprise in before the credits, unlike with Iron Man.
I thought it was good, but it was no Iron Man. The way the last fight ended was bullshit. There were a lot of things wrong with it (can’t remember most of them now), but they were overridden by the awesome action sequences.
[quote]StupidMonkey wrote:
The Hulk still looks pretty fake (I mean, apart from being a giant, green behemoth)[/quote]
Dammit. That’s the ONE thing that peeves me. They can create an amazingly real T-Rex with CGI for the Jurassic Park series, but they can’t make one convincing muscle-bound green dude for the Hulk? It’s not like there are no large-muscled men in this world to use as reference!
Baaah! I’ll go see it anyway.
[quote]Steel Nation wrote:
I thought it was good, but it was no Iron Man. The way the last fight ended was bullshit. There were a lot of things wrong with it (can’t remember most of them now), but they were overridden by the awesome action sequences.[/quote]
I agree. I watched it and was entertained but I felt the storyline was way oversimplified and I didn’t feel any climax to the plot. The acting was great and the special effects were decent.
Iron Man is still the best superhero movie so far IMHO.
[quote]iron_siren wrote:
Steel Nation wrote:
I thought it was good, but it was no Iron Man. The way the last fight ended was bullshit. There were a lot of things wrong with it (can’t remember most of them now), but they were overridden by the awesome action sequences.
I agree. I watched it and was entertained but I felt the storyline was way oversimplified and I didn’t feel any climax to the plot. The acting was great and the special effects were decent.
Iron Man is still the best superhero movie so far IMHO.
[/quote]
They apparently cut out TONS of footage in this movie, including the discussion banner had with Doc Sampson. I can see now why Norton took his name off of producing credit.
It seems they had a choice to make. They knew from the last movie that people don’t have the attention span to accept a detailed explanation of HOW he became the Hulk. They knew that people wanted more action. I guess they split the difference and ended up with this…much less story.
I personally like detailed story lines and I sure as hell hope all of the edits make it onto the DVD.