"Hulk" sending execs Green?

[Conquest10]

http://www.moviehole.net/news.php?newsid=1638

"Hulk" sending execs Green?

The word on “The Hulk” is not good. Not good at all. And it doesn’t surprise me. I’ve heard people refer to the CGI teeming pilot as “Shrek”. Now that’s demoralizing. According to the wonderful Andy Jones at E Online, a test screening went down about as well as William Shatner’s first LP.

Says Jones, “I hear execs at Universal are turning green this week after a not so incredible screening of Hulk. The studio's top brass was practically speechless. Apparently, director Ang Lee has turned in a melodramatic take on the comic book with an emphasis on drama--as in, really long and boring. Uh-oh. The suits concerns are way beyond the fanboy fears that the CGI big guy will look cheesy.

Still, isn't this what Lee promised from the get-go? He has always said Hulk would be an examination of our repressed selves and the release of unchecked rage--an emotion Bruce Banner expresses by turning into a 15-foot mighty green giant. I always expected the story to be a psychological journey--it's about the Hulk inside all of us. Still, one exec says, "It's like he combined The Ice Storm with Shrek." Yikes. Regardless, I can't wait.”

Can’t say I’m as excited to see “The Hulk” as I was, say, “X-Men 2”, but I’ll definitely be there, if only to support Eric. Here’s hoping he doesn’t need though.

[mysticgohan17]

ang lee directed the action so its partly his fault, the director of photography selected the shots, its probably his fault too. the blame should go to the screenplay writer. and if the novelization was derived from the screenplay, thic could be the worst movie franchise since the post-Batman returns sequels.

[Peter H]

to counter the article from e!online there is this article from shh (i think it is superhero hype)Does E! Online Know Its Hulk Movie Facts?
Friday, May 16, 2003 5:00 CDT

E! Online is spreading negative word about The Hulk movie around, but do they know what they're talking about? Apparently not. Here's 'Spidey-Jason'...

Hi, people from Hulk Hype. As you know, E!Online published an article saying that the Universal execs were not satisfied with an screening The Hulk. However,the moderator of the official hulk site, She-Hulk, said what really happened. Here are her words: "I can truthfully say that the whole thing was lie and a big fat rumor. It was a tiny group of execs who saw it-- and when they came out of the screening room, they were nothing but amazed at ang lee's brillant job on this film. They were speechless--as will we be when we see it"


who to beleive? only time will tell i guess.

[twonabomber]

to tell you the truth...i didn't think much of Spider-Man. the CGI looked too fake in some parts. i can't see how a CGI character that's not hidden under a costume is going to look much better. hopefully i'm wrong.

[pacmania_2001]

I think the Hulk will be much better than Spiderman (not a fan of the film).

Personally the CGI Hulk doesn't bother me, it would be worse if they had of just got some body builder and painted his skin green.

[mysticgohan17]

... it would be worse if they had of just got some body builder and painted his skin green.

...Lou Ferigino

[pacmania_2001]

Here is a photo from AICN. I don' t think the CGI looks too bad in this photo apart from the pants (just look fake).

[tgpo]

What is it with all these Comic book movies? And why do so many of them have to suck? The Hulk looks dumb, X-Men 2 sucked, Fantastic Four is on the way. Has Hollywood run out of good ideas?

[Karate Media]

What is it with all these Comic book movies? And why do so many of them have to suck? The Hulk looks dumb, X-Men 2 sucked, Fantastic Four is on the way. Has Hollywood run out of good ideas?

I'm not really sure that Hollywood ever had original ideas, but that's besides the point...

Comic book readers want to see their favorite characters in action -- reading comics is like reading the storyboard of a movie, and sometimes you'd like to see it brought to life.

And it's not just standard superhero comics -- From Hell, Road to Perdition, Ghost World, Bulletproof Monk, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, even Men in Black and the Mask were all based on comic books (not all of them -- movies and/or comics -- were or will be good, of course). This may only support your point, I guess but how many movies are truly original anyway? Ultimately, we're dealing with a limited number of archetypal stories anyway, so it just boils down to how well it's done (eg, Star Wars)

I think I'll post more "Surprise, it's from a comic!" movies as I think of them...

[tgpo]

Your right, and I'm guessing your Star Wars reference is how not to do a movie. I knew most of those were from comic books. Another one is Tank Girl.

[tgpo]

Dick Tracy, Spawn, Superman

[Karate Media]

Your right, and I'm guessing your Star Wars reference is how not to do a movie. I knew most of those were from comic books. Another one is Tank Girl.

Whaaa? I hope you are joking, or else this could turn ugly quick! I don't think you want to tell a bunch of internet video geeks that Star Wars sucked!

Actually, I was just referencing the Joeseph Campbell/Power of Myth/Star Wars connection -- basically that Star Wars is a well-done retelling of an archetypal story... But to each his own opinion...

let's see...also Josie And the Pussycats, Blade, Mystery Men, and Barbarella, too, I believe...

[Karate Media]

Dick Tracy, Spawn, Superman

You are so full of sh**! Superman was not based on a comic! It was based on a TV show that starred Christopher Reeve's dad!

[Bullworth]

I can aleady see that this is slowly going to turn into a debate of some sort.
Anyways, it´s more interesting to see a good rehash of a story that´s been told before than a so-called original story that just blows. Even though it´s not in the sci-fi relm I think the Count of Monte Cristo was a good example of an old plot being retold from a fresh point of view. Alexander Dumas´ work may have been original in his time but by now it´s a story that´s been used to death. The way the movie was done wasn´t enough to make me go "Wow!", but just enough to keep me entertained throughout the movie.
I guess my point is it´s not how much money is spent on the movie (Waterworld anyone?) but how well it is put together (LOTR).

[tgpo]

I guess I'm still into movies that require little to no CG work. I HATE seeing computer characters that I'm suppose to believe are real, Jar Jar for example. And the little thing in the second Harry Potter. I believe the motto that if you use computer graphics, in the finished product you shouldn't be able to tell you used computer graphics. Which I guess is why I'm not a fan of movies such as Hulk, etc.

[tenders]

i have seen alot of movies that were almost "PROMISED TO BE A BIG HIT" that turned out to be a "dud"; but i have also seen movies that turned out to be a surprise! i tjink i will wait and make that judgement for myself

[tgpo]

To be honest I though all of the Star Wars movies sucked.

[WeedVender]

Anyone remember the CG of the Scorpion king in the Mummy 2? HORRIBLE ! CRAP! SHIT! (excuse moi).
But still...

Hollywood needs to get their acts together...
I hate stupid plots, I hate overhyped movies (SpiderMan and Fast and the Furious), just makes me sick... The only movie in the last couple of years that actually had a good or excellent plot was
Spy Game
and the Matrix Reloaded

thats it
btw: the new releases of star wars (ep1 and ep2)
SUCK !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next Generation Classic....

[mysticgohan17]

there are 2 types of comic books, marvel and everything else.

[Nitemare]

I was really excited about seeing The Hulk until I saw the trailers they're showing now on TV. The CGI is hideous... the Hulk looks like a cartoon! This group would have been better off making a Roger Rabbit sequel.

The movie had better have one HECK of a storyline because the actual Hulk scenes are just too hideous to watch! They won't see any money from me at the theater for sure. I'm not even sure I'll rent the DVD when it comes out.

If that's the best they could do then I'll take Lou Ferigno any day! I've flushed down better looking "hulks" than what I saw in the preview.

Just my $.02,
Nitemare

[EddyH]

i wanna smack anyone who ever thought trying to combine 3D-ish CG into otherwise 2D hand-drawn style animation was ever a good idea... or cartoonish CG into live-action for that matter (totally skipping Final Fantasy and letting Roger Rabbit off the hook..)

it looked ugly waybackwhen in Beauty and the Beast, disney managed some improvements in hiding it since (but still a bit over obvious), and when you see it in productions by other companies (spirited away even... or perhaps "especially") it just doesn't gel right. whereas on the other hand the advanced style 3D-ish hand drawn things in 80s cartoons or even in some parts of the simpsons look *really cool*, if only because it fits in better and the expectations are lower.

[mysticgohan17]

is it more cost effective to render one set of giant purple cut-off shorts, or to create hundreds.

[tenders]

is it more cost effective to render one set of giant purple cut-off shorts, or to create hundreds.

hmmm.......
is that a trick question??

[mysticgohan17]

well, too bad for them, what money they will make should be lost to piracy, the hulk has been bootlegged. 2 weeks before release.

edit: now that i've seen it, the movie aint half bad.its no b-movie. i think it's worth considering. the only bad part was burce's dad. nick nolte f***** up the whole movie. except for the mutant dogs that was cool seeing them get ripped apart

[pacmania_2001]

well, too bad for them, what money they will make should be lost to piracy, the hulk has been bootlegged. 2 weeks before release.

I don't really think piracy will affect the money it takes. Most people even if they do download a pirated copy will still go see in at the cinema's as it is just that type of movie that calls for 5.1 sound and a large screen.

[Craig Tucker]

I guess I'm still into movies that require little to no CG work. I HATE seeing computer characters that I'm suppose to believe are real, Jar Jar for example. And the little thing in the second Harry Potter. I believe the motto that if you use computer graphics, in the finished product you shouldn't be able to tell you used computer graphics. Which I guess is why I'm not a fan of movies such as Hulk, etc.

But you liked toxic avenger with that top notch make-up job

[tgpo]

But you liked toxic avenger with that top notch make-up job

But that movie didn't put the effects above the story. Granted the acting was horrible, and the production value was nil, I still liked the movie. And if I remember correctly, not a single computer effect.

[The village idiot]

well, too bad for them, what money they will make should be lost to piracy, the hulk has been bootlegged. 2 weeks before release.

edit: now that i've seen it, the movie aint half bad.its no b-movie. i think it's worth considering. the only bad part was burce's dad. nick nolte f***** up the whole movie. except for the mutant dogs that was cool seeing them get ripped apart

I couldn't make it past the first 20 minutes or so. But the print was pretty good

[The village idiot]

there are 2 types of comic books, marvel and everything else.

Can't say as I'm into the tights and capes crowd ....


Another comic to movie: The Crow. Read the book, it is very good.

[Craig Tucker]

But you liked toxic avenger with that top notch make-up job

But that movie didn't put the effects above the story. Granted the acting was horrible, and the production value was nil, I still liked the movie. And if I remember correctly, not a single computer effect.

I have to admit I do like some really good kick ass CG effects, but a good story has to be there to compliment it. I am not saying you put special effects before a storyline, but I think if either is lacking it spoils the movie. A good story with really crappy looking special effects is spoilt just as much as really good special effects but with a crappy story.