Home > Blogs > Sir Critic on Cinema > Archives > 2008 > June > 13 > Entry
The Merely OK Hulk
No, The Incredible Hulk is absolutely not better than the 2003 film - and I expect a lot of people to disagree with me about that.
As much as I defend Ang Lee’s Hulk with Eric Bana and Jennifer Connelly (here’s my 2003 review), I understand I’m in a small minority. But I also understand why people didn’t like it. For them, it was too cerebral, too slow, too somber. For me, it was a fascinating film that replicated the look and feel of a comic book better than any other superhero movie. However, I think most people wanted to see more of the Hulk smashing and less of Bruce Banner brooding about his tragic life.
So when I heard about this “do-over,” I expected it to be more of an action flick - and that in itself is fine. I like action movies as long as they’re done well, like Spider-Man 2 or Iron Man - but The Incredible Hulk isn’t even close to being in their league. It’s not even as entertaining as Daredevil.
The Incredible Hulk is all the more disappointing because it begins very promisingly, with Bruce Banner (Edward Norton) living in Brazil and trying to learn ways to control his anger - until soldiers sent by arch nemesis General Ross (William Hurt) track him down. There’s a terrific chase that would fit right in with the Bourne movies, and the Hulk effects are generally improved from the first film.
Once that first big set piece is done, though, so is the movie. Ironically, Marvel Studios has tried to make the new movie more muscular - but in so doing, they’ve made it dumber - not unlike the big green guy himself.
“But a movie about a big green guy trashing stuff should be loud and dumb,” some might argue. Really? A movie about a man who unwillingly turns into a monster sounds like it should have some drama to me, and this film only makes a half-hearted stab at that. Word had it that Norton wanted to give the movie more drama, but Marvel wanted more action and Marvel won.
The problem is, except for the opening, the action scenes aren’t better than halfway decent. Louis Letterrier, the director of the Transporter movies, is capable enough, but he has nowhere near the flair of a Martin Campbell (Casino Royale) or a Jon Favreau (Iron Man).
What attempt the movie does make at drama is undermined by uneven performances. Norton is good, but Hurt phoned in his performance, and I didn’t buy Liv Tyler as Bruce’s scientist girlfriend, much better played by Connelly. And why cast a great actor like Tim Roth, and then throw him away on a boring villain who could have been played by any C-list actor worth his SAG card? A decent episode of the Bill Bixby TV series had more drama than this movie.
The fans have been fawning over this film, but I think they’re overreacting based on their disappointment in the 2003 picture. I’m willing to bet if this Hulk movie had come first, fans wouldn’t have liked it either. Marvel may have added “Incredible” to the title, but they took it out of the Hulk.
GRADE: C+
Permalink | Comments (2) | Post your comment | Categories: Reviews
Comments
By Otis
June 13, 2008 10:33 AM | Link to this
I’m in the small minority with you … I liked the 2003 movie, too. I’ll still go see this one …By SRCputt
June 13, 2008 10:09 AM | Link to this
Ang Lee has been one of my favorite directors ever since Eat Drink Man Woman, so of course I agree with Eric about the first Hulk. For me, the director’s chair is exactly where The Incredible Hulk became for me The Ordinary Hulk. Iron Man and Hulk had the feel of a director who knoew what he was doing. Louis Letterier is a second tier director, and he has delivered a second tier movie. It isn’t a terrible film, just an ordinary one. Although one element stands out for me as a major mistake: I didn’t buy for a second that Liv Tyler was a world-class scientist. This stands out for me especially because Jennifer Connelly was great in the first Hulk. But Connelly comes across to me as a scientist, Tyler comes across as a model.