comment #1

Bocephus says ...

Bruce Banner was always a downer character. All this tells me is that they are being faithful to the source. How would you feel if you woke up in the wake of massive-scale destruction, caused by you, after every time you got mad?

It was criminal dragging Peter Parker and Mary Jane through the mopey muck in Spiderman 3 because it was so out of character.

Noone will complain if we get a few mopey Banner scenes as long as there is a good amount of Hulk tearing shit up.

comment #2

chicbn872 says ...

It looks like the cover of "The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan"...except he's pissed because Suze Rotolo is nowhere to be found.

comment #3

Rich S. says ...

Norton's pose is VERY reminiscent of the end of each episode of the series, where Bill Bixby would move on to the next town after he had Hulked Out. I think Bixby even wore a denim jacket.

comment #4

dangovich says ...

He looks like he's checking out the Hulk's ass.

comment #5

Mgmax says ...

Because Marvel Comics are all about teen self-pity combined with superpowers. Next you're going to ask why the guys on the covers of romance novels can't afford shirts.

Dangovich wins this thread, by the way. Yeah, it's totally The Fabulous Hulk.

comment #6

Glenn Whipp says ...

Banner is an American. He's not morose. He's bitter. In the picture, he's probably thinking about God. Or buying a gun.

comment #7

bents75 says ...

I think everyone is going to owe Ang Lee an apology for talking so much shit over the years after this piece of crap opens.

You're going to be much more appreciative of the creative chances he took in comparison.

comment #8

bill weber says ...

I like moroseness. Just not in pretentious comic-book movies.

comment #9

insidah says ...

I just don't understand the existence of this movie. I know Hollywood has been choking on its tail lately, due to a generation of pathetically sentimental and risk averse studio execs, but this is the nadir. A remake/relaunch of a movie less than a decade old. It boggles the mind. while we're at it, why don't we remake the Stepford Wives remake...or Godzilla...or Mission Impossible 3 - or any other underperformer that just came out. King Kong should have done better, right? Let's remake that next year.

comment #10

Doug Pratt says ...

THe whole thing says, 'phallus,' to me

comment #11

christian says ...

I ike the poster. Very Marvel.

comment #12

GonePostal says ...

The whole "Hulk" mythos is a downer. The Hulk is an outcast, he just wants to be left alone and Banner desperately wants to find some kind of human connection to keep the rage from overflowing. That's the classic Hulk story, and maybe that's what the movie is going for.

That's also what bothered me about Ang Lee's version. He made some interesting choices, sure, but the story was still awful. The Banner character was "destined" to be the Hulk because of his father, and was never portrayed as particularly nerdy and out of touch, which was what Banner was in the comic. There's also the internal Hulk/Banner conflict that wasa absent from Lee's film as well. The trailers for the new Hulk actually seem to show a better understanding for the source material than the Lee film. Plus, those Hulk Dogs were awful, and Ang Lee should have known better.

comment #13

Mgmax says ...

Right, it's basically an allegory of puberty, I'm a little kid inside but my body is suddenly strong enough to really hurt things. Lee way overgilded that lily.

comment #14

Cory says ...

Postal,

I'm sure if Lee had a chance to make a sequel to his film, we would've got the internal struggle between the two characters. And that specific theme was mentioned briefly in Lee's film.

Again, it was an origin story. This new film will benefit from the groundwork Lee started, even if it's an all new beginning to the Hulk mythos.

But, it won't have nearly the artistry or ambition Lee attempted with his film.

Universal looks bad with this new attempt so soon.

comment #15

last_child says ...

I'll just back up the comments that say that the "depressed" look of the poster reinforces the original Hulk mythology.

In fact, in later years of the comic, the story introduced some psychological aspects, suggesting that the Hulk was a physical manifestation of the Bruce's suppressed rage, the result of an abusive father.

comment #16

storymark says ...

I find it interesting that they keep calling it a reboot, unrelated to the Lee film, but that doesn't seem to wash, story-wise. They're not re-telling the origin. The character relationships will all be in-place, essentially the same as they were in the Lee film. This one reportedly starts off with Banner in hiding in the Amazon - which is exactly how the Lee film ended.

It strikes me as a lot of spin, for what seems to be more-or-less a sequel. Don't see how it's any more of a reboot than Batman Forever was. Different cast and crew and look, but the storyline seems to be a continuation.

comment #17

Rich S. says ...

Wasn't this supposed to be a direct-to-video thing? Then Marvel was impressed with the initial work on it, Norton got involved and it morphed into a theatrical release. Kind of like Toy Story 2.

comment #18

GonePostal says ...

Cory,

Maybe he would have gotten to that duality is a sequel, but the "climactic battle" in "Hulk", along with the Hulk dogs still make "Hulk" a failure, and I think a good origin story for the Green Guy would be all about that duality. I liked a lot of what Lee did, but I still think it's a failed movie that is much less than the sum of it's parts.

Rich S., I get the same feeling you do, that this isn't a reboot but a sequel with an entirely different cast. Which is fine with me. It would be stupid to redo and entire origin film just because the first wasn't great. My feeling is if you've got a good story, go with it.

comment #19

Edward says ...

Even if this is good, I 'm afraid it will get buried by the other blockbusters. If I were to chose between Hulk, Batman, Ironman or even Indy IV...Hulk comes in last.

comment #20

p.Vice says ...

At this point the only thing we can hope for is that they'll get it right the third time around.

comment #21

BurmaShave says ...

"I've got troubles of my own, and I don't go to movies to add to them. "

I say this with love Wells, but imagine what you'd say to someone using this as an excuse to not see UNITED 93 or IN THE VALLEY OF ELAH.

comment #22

swordandpen says ...

On this poster, Edward Norton looks like he's thinking about how he got from "Fight Club" to this crap.

comment #23

jse33 says ...

I believe Universal is only distributing the film. The production costs are all Marvel.

In addition to the Hulk dogs, another thing I'm looking forward to NOT seeing in this film is Nick Nolte. His horrible overacting from Lee's Huilk certainly didn't help matters. And let's not forget that shitty ending either. Thanks Mr. Lee!

comment #24

Sweetbubba says ...

Lee's Hulk film was a misfire, but it was still a film made by quality actors and a director who weren't creatively bankrupt with excellent production values. Norton/Roth are certainly capable of delivering engaging performances, but the rest of this movie just looks awful and thoroughly c-grade.

I'll take a weaker effort from a quality director like Lee over any contribution from a hack, any day.

In terms of fidelity to the comic - I could care less what the movie changes, but a lot of posters here seem to be basing their impressions on the Bixby TV show rather than any knowledge of the comic. There's definitely no single characterization of the Hulk from the comic - in fact, for most of the 47 year history of the comic character, he has been intelligent and controlled by Banner, not a Hyde-character triggered by anger. But there have been about a dozen variations, so there's certainly ample room to take almost any creative direction from the character. Not that there was ever any doubt that this ;lazy and uninspired remake would once again opt for the "Hulk Smash" type

comment #25

corey3rd says ...

It's like an ad for Boner Pills.

comment #26

Mgmax says ...

"Even if this is good"

it'll still be a movie about the Incredible Hulk. Guy's bummed, guy gets angry, the Jolly Green Steroid comes out and smashes large things. We're not exactly talking Visconti here.

comment #27

El Kabong says ...

Not to go all zit-poppin', cellar-dwellin', never-had-a-grilfriend, geeky on you all, but I'm pretty sure that poster is, at least in part, an homage to an old Spider Man comic book cover from the 1960s.

God, it's sad that I haven't picked up a comic in over fifteen years and I still remember that. Can someone remind who's running for president this year? My mind keeps crowding out that information with the names of the members of the "Banana Splits".

comment #28

Rich S. says ...

Fleegle, Bingo, Drooper and Snorky. And yes, I did that without consulting any other reference material.

comment #29

storymark says ...

"- in fact, for most of the 47 year history of the comic character, he has been intelligent and controlled by Banner, "

That's not really true. There have been spells where he was intellegent, sometimes controlled by Banner, sometimes not, and sometimes it was the big green body with Banner's mind intact. But the majority of the character's existance has been as the Jekyl/Hyde "You won't like me when I'm angry" variation, and each time they do a different spin, they always end up going back to that version eventually.

comment #30

storymark says ...

Mgmax - This would be the one you're likely thinking of:

http://65.img.v4.skyrock.com/651/parker033/pics/108345189_small.jpg

comment #31

D.Z. says ...

insidah: Actually, there were rumours of a sequel/reboot to Godzilla '98.

comment #32

the king says ...

It's an homage to the loaner character on the TV show.

I think it looks like the Taxi Driver poster.

comment #33

J. Huff says ...

All I know is that I never read the comic, loved the TV show when I was 5 years old, thought the last movie was meh when I saw it a year late on DVD...and this poster just took me back to being 5 and playing Hulk in the playground with everyone else who was enraptured by it. When you're 5, you don't realize the whole pathos side of it.

Of course, I don't know that it will sell tickets, since I'm now 34 and most people under my age have no recollection of the show whatsoever. But if the poster is truly representative of what the film's feel is like and truly goes for the television feel, yeah, I'd buy a ticket.