Starring: Edward Norton (Bruce Banner), Liv Tyler (Betty Ross), Tim Roth (Emil Blonsky), William Hurt (Gen. "Thunderbolt" Ross), Tim Blake Nelson, Robert Downey Jr. (Tony Stark)
The explosive, action-packed adventure in one of the all-time most popular superhero sagas unfolds with a cure in reach for the world's most primal force of fury: THE INCREDIBLE HULK. We find scientist Bruce Banner (Edward Norton) living in shadows, scouring the planet for an antidote. But the warmongers who dream of abusing his powers won't leave him alone, nor will his need to be with the only woman he has ever loved, Betty Ross (Liv Tyler).
Upon returning to civilization, our brilliant doctor is ruthlessly pursued by The Abomination (Tim Roth)--a nightmarish beast of pure adrenaline and aggression whose powers match The Hulk's own. A fight of comic-book proportions ensues as Banner must call upon the hero within to rescue New York City from total destruction. And on June 13, 2008...one scientist must make an agonizing final choice--accept a peaceful life as Bruce Banner or the creature he could permanently become: THE INCREDIBLE HULK.
If at first you don't succeed, try again. Marvel seems to be under the impression that their first Hulk movie was a flop of Serenity proportions, so they've tossed everything related to it out the window and come up with something completely different for their big green superhero.
Except the first Hulk wasn't really a failure, merely somewhat disappointing. Even now, after the world seems to have turned on it, it still holds on to a middle of the road 60 percent rating on Rotten Tomatoes. That means more positive reviews for it than negative ones. Then there's its 2003 take at the box office. It made $245 million internationally, and only cost $137 million to make. I'd call that a tidy profit.
So why has Marvel decided to throw their muscley green baby out with the bathwater? Blame fans. Since the movie's theatrical debut that mild disappointment in a solid but ultimately mediocre film has turned into massive overreaction. The further Hulk-a-holics get from the film, the worse it seems to become. Now it's inexplicably become a punchline, a container for capturing all the worst outpouring of anger comic book nerds feel at the way Hollywood has botched a lot of their favorite properties. All that hatred they should be feeling for movies like Elektra has been funneled into Hulk. It's not hard, he's a pretty big target.
The only way out of being a bad Pollock joke for Marvel was to call their new movie a reboot, and pretend the other one never happened. Except it's not so much a reboot as a continuation with an all new cast, crew, and a completely different tone. Shh, don't tell anyone. They're much too busy burning the old movie in effigy to notice.
As it turns out, rebooting may be for the best. Whether you liked Ang Lee's version of Hulk or not, it's hard not to notice that this new Incredible Hulk kicks the other's ass in vital stats. Grab a pencil and play match up the cast. On paper, there's every reason to believe that this version of the Hulk will be even better.
Note: This website is not meant for use by minors. The views expressed in the comments section below are not our own. This section is intended for discussion of the topic in the post above. Disagreement is encouraged, however comments which attack, insult, or threaten the author in a personal manner won't be published. Similarly, comments that we deem to be poorly worded, or wildly off topic will also not be approved and may be mocked. For free, uncensored, unfettered, and possibly dangerous discussion visit our forum.
Serenity wasn't some gigantic flop; it cost $39 million, made ALMOST all of that back in theaters, and started making a profit on DVD. Sure, it wasn't a hit, but it's not a very good example of a flop, since that was the point your were trying to make...
I think this new Hulk may not of been in response to the negativity of the last film but more in the direction of being the second puzzle piece ( after Iron Man ) to lead to the Avengers film.
Edward Norton is going to make this movie a Blockbuster. Previous Hulk was OK but it wasnt made to satisfy the new wave of movie gowers. Previous one would've made more millions at the box office if it had been released at the end of 80's begining 90's next to Batman. This one though will bring back the old school Hulk T- Shirts. It's Edward Hulkton's time now.
The first hulk film was cool, i have no objections to this new one although a few new trailers would be nice, edward norton looks like hell make the the film work, hope iron man does the cameo appearence maybe trying to fight him in his hulkbuster suit? that would be nice.
Gigli was a flop. Serenity was... unimpressive, both in box office and on the screen.
And to whomever used the "it made it's money back at the box office" argument... no, it didn't. Investors do not get every box office dollar back. It's generally estimated they get about half. However it did probably make just as much if not more on the DVD market (it would seem virtually everyone who saw it at the cinema bought the DVD) so it likely pulled even or just ahead in the long run. So not a flop. Just mediocre.
Hulk on the other hand nabbed $245M at the box office and cost $137M to make plus $35M production budget. So it too lost the box office battle since it cost $172M and it netted about $130M. But it would have had marketing deals with Maccas or Burger King or someone and toys and all the rest of it, along with DVD sales and TV rights... it would have also just about drawn even, maybe gotten ahead by a few percent. But just as mediocre and Serenity one would guess, possibly worse in the investors eyes since it's no/little return on a much larger investment.
Personally I thought Hulk was terrible, and as much as I like Norton & Roth they've both been in some crappy films and I fully expect the director of The Transporter films to help them add another "The Musketeer" to Roth's CV and another "Death to Smoochy" to Norton's.
Although Danny the Dog/Unleashed showed potential, so there's the chance it may come out OKish.
The first Hulk movie was well done except it was...boring.
Its a movie based on a comic book character. Comic book characters fight villains. Its not rocket science. The first Hulk movie had him fighting 3 dogs. Huh? A ridiculous scene for a COMIC BOOK MOVIE. Follow the easy formula, people...
Comic book nerds had nothing to do with it, Josh. Even the average non-comic book fan can see that it was too artsy for the genre.
Hopefully this Hulk movie version can right the ship and try to be more entertaining.
Hmm The first hulk was someone dissappointing..couldve done done better..cuz Erica bana was a good actor..Whos to blame? u know it..the writers and producers lol...."pointing fingers" hahha
This site is operated by Cinema Blend LLC. For advertising inquiries, contact Gorilla Nation. CinemaBlend.com is a private, independently owned website which is intended only as entertainment. The views expressed on this website may or may not reflect those of its owner. Don't take us too seriously.
March 14th, 2008 at 18:09
Serenity wasn't some gigantic flop; it cost $39 million, made ALMOST all of that back in theaters, and started making a profit on DVD. Sure, it wasn't a hit, but it's not a very good example of a flop, since that was the point your were trying to make...