Bullets 'n' Babes

http://movies.ign.com/articles/780/780810p1.html

Yeah, I'm sure that this film will blow. Seriously? Written by Zak Penn who wrote the shittiest X-men film (no. 3) and directed by Louis Louterrier (Transporter - nuff said)?

Ang Lee's Hulk was superb a character piece, likely this will just be actiony crud (the horrors of Transporter 2 come to mind).

I wasnt impressed all that much by The Hulk by Ang Lee, but it wasnt a bad movie, and stayed pretty faithfull to the original story. Main problem is mainly that the original story and character both arent very interesting. The comics sucked, the cartoons and TV serie sucked, and the movie may not have 'sucked', but it wasnt all that interesting either.

The Hulk works much better when he's actually a 'villain' to Spider-man or the Avengers or whatever. As a main character, he's a bit bland. That problem was partly solved when they turned him into Grey Hulk, where he was both extremely strong AND still had a few braincells so he could operate as a normal being.

This news about the new Hulk movie, the casting, the writer and the director... all sounds pretty shitty.

Marvel should just hire a kick-ass good quality CGI production company and make their superhero flicks completely in lovely CGI. You can stay much closer to the comicbook origins and look.

If Ang Lee hadn't have directed the Hulk, people would never claim it's a "superb character piece" they'd label it as the pretentious bag of shite that it is.

Shingster wrote:If Ang Lee hadn't have directed the Hulk, people would never claim it's a "superb character piece" they'd label it as the pretentious bag of shite that it is.

But nobody claims it as a superb character piece, apart from Eva, me and this other guy that I know. It's universally slated.

Well... the director has to make a movie about a pretty boring bland 1 dimensional character, The Hulk, or about the transition of a human being transforming into the Hulk. Onbiously, the latter is more interesting, from a storytelling POV. Especially when it's the first movie about the origins. It's a bit of a shame that Bruce Banner himself has also always been a bit of a boring character.

BiscLimpkit wrote:But nobody claims it as a superb character piece, apart from Eva, me and this other guy that I know. It's universally slated.

I've seen many fans of the film justify their love of it with the same comment (as if just saying "I like it, so what" isn't enough for some reason), and indeed many of the tabloid critics approached the film as an arthouse/superhero crossover because, well that's what Ang Lee did with the kung fu genre in his previous film (which of course was also complete bollocks).

Well... the director has to make a movie about a pretty boring bland 1 dimensional character, The Hulk, or about the transition of a human being transforming into the Hulk. Onbiously, the latter is more interesting, from a storytelling POV. Especially when it's the first movie about the origins. It's a bit of a shame that Bruce Banner himself has also always been a bit of a boring character.

Which is exactly the problem imo. Hulk is not supposed to be some profound character story, it's supposed to be a big loud, garish smashy-smashy action flick. It's certainly not the most profound serial that Stan lee thought up, that's for sure.

HULK SMASH!


Not HULK think about a loved one and watch green moss

Shingster wrote:

Well... the director has to make a movie about a pretty boring bland 1 dimensional character, The Hulk, or about the transition of a human being transforming into the Hulk. Onbiously, the latter is more interesting, from a storytelling POV. Especially when it's the first movie about the origins. It's a bit of a shame that Bruce Banner himself has also always been a bit of a boring character.

Which is exactly the problem imo. Hulk is not supposed to be some profound character story, it's supposed to be a big loud, garish smashy-smashy action flick. It's certainly not the most profound serial that Stan lee thought up, that's for sure.

I agree with you. A movie about The Hulk really shouldnt have been made, simply cause he's just not interesting enough. However, now that it was made, and they needed to do the origin story, I guess this was the best way to go, by focussing on Banner.

I really dont see how a sequel could be succesfull. Like you said, it's supposed to be loud, garish smashy smashy action, but you will have a character which you will feel no empathy for, unless you turn him into some kind of King Kong, and using Betty as the love interest... but even than you would still need a memorable villain or whatever. But The Hulk is so fucking basic in his behaviour, that it wouldnt be a fight between good and bad, but between someone who THINKS the Hulk is bad and evil and a danger, and takes action to destroy him. That would probably be one of only a very very few possible plotlines, and TBH I almost fell asleep during writing those few lines, so no way that's gonna be interesting in a 90+ minute flick...

That's the whole problem. He's not interesting or smart enough to have as a main character. They cant use him in another movie as a villain or whatever, due to licensing stuff (probably), and Banner himself is a boring uninteresting guy...
So they should either make the guy smarter, or pit him against a worthy memorable and interesting foe, or go out of this world and go sci-fi or whatever...

In a way, it's a catch 22. Ang Lee stayed true to the comic book origins and just focussed on the change of one guy into a green monster... but by putting the emphasis on that story, the movie lacked mindless action and thus dissapointed that fraction of the crowd who went in and thought that's all there is to be expected from The Hulk.

And if he had made a balls to the walls mindless hardcore action movie with The Hulk on a 90+ minute 'destroy everything in sight rampage', he also would have dissapointed a part of the fanbase who feel The Hulk isnt just about destroying stuff...

So you're always gonna dissapoint people with this character, simply because different people expect different things from this character.

TBH, it would take a very very good scriptwriter to write a good movie about The Hulk.

So again, I say, they should just make CGI flicks from now on, so they're completely free to go for any story, any character, any grahic style, etc etc...

Liv Tyler is the new Betty Ross.
http://www.superherohype.com/news/topnews.php?id=5617

Not a bad choice, they could've done a lot worse She's no near as hot as Jennifer Connelly (or the same level of acting ability for that matter).

FTW!

I don't think the movie Hulk was shit, but it wasnt that great either, the attempt to make an "arty" superhero film didnt work IMO and the Hulk looked like a green jumping bean I thought it was a bit boring TBH.

Superb tits.

Tim Roth has been cast as Abomination.
http://www.superherohype.com/news/topnews.php?id=5648

Superb character actor, it's a mystery why his career never took off after Reservoir Dogs.


Abomination was originally a Soviet spy before his gamma mutation. Unlike the Savage Hulk he retained his intelligence.

Dogs was a flop in America. It helped his career in the UK though.

Haha, what is it with him taking control over films he acts in?! To be fair, American History X turned out great, but still, it's not fair on directors.