Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

UPDATED: Reports on Ang Lee's HULK movie... not all good...

Hey folks, Harry here... I just got a call from a source/friend inside UNIVERSAL that has seen the script (yes I'm working it). According to him Banner's Father does experiment on himself and passes this practice onto Bruce (ie.. self-experimentation) but this does not result in HULKING out. Now, the report later down on the page by Mr Xtra claims that Bruce doesn't do back and forth transformations is refuted by this MORE TRUSTED source. Apparently... THANKFULLY... he transforms much like he does in the books, very Jekyll and Hyde, but apparently as the film moves forward his anger and control issues grow more and more out of hand resulting in larger and even less human HULKING OUT, but he always reverts eventually back to Banner. So that clarifies two rumors right away. So as you read the following, know that we are on the case attempting to find out all that we can. And Ms. Erection, by all means put that... ahem... document out post haste!

Hey folks, Harry here... Some interesting additional reports have been surfacing on the Ang Lee HULK movie. And some of it has my Spidey Sense going. This first report is very... calm and no bad signs...

Hey Harry!

Long time reader first time contributor...with that out of the way I've some info on the INCREDIBLE HULK for you.

One of the main sets for the film will be located on Treasure Island. In the middle of San Francisco bay sits Yerba Buena Island and Treasure Island. YB Island is a natural island but TI is man made. It was made the early part of the last century for the Panama Exhibition and was used a couple years later for the World's Fair. During WWII, the Navy took it over and had control of it until all the military bases were closed in the early to mid 90's. Since that time the Navy has leased TI to the city of San Francisco for housing and other things (fireman's school, Job Corps etc). The old base also has three huge hangers that have been used by Hollywood whenever they film in the Bay Area. Hanger #1 was used for SWEET NOVEMBER and Comedy Central films Battle Bots out there. Hanger #2 was used for six years by NASH BRIDGES and #3 was used for WHAT DREAMS MAY COME (the huge library/lake set) and FLUBBER (the gym for the basketball game).

In the past couple weeks all the signs that say Treasure Island have been coming down and a lot of sprucing up and painting has been done. Today a new sign was put up at the main guard gate that reads FORCE WEST. Also direction signs just inside the guard gate were put up that read things like "Command Center" , "Hospital" and so on. I asked a lady I know that works out there if the changes were for "The Hulk" and she said they were.

The island offers fantastic views of San Francisco as well as both bridges and Alcatraz. Plus it's away from the city so there won't be to many people complaining about the production taking away the already nonexistent parking spaces (which happened a lot when NASH BRIDGES filmed here.

Nothing major as far as info, but I thought you'd like to know.



Ok, now here is the next report... Now you may remember Mr. Xtra's report on the DAREDEVIL costume, which the next day was basically confirmed by Kevin Smith at some University talk where he described the DAREDEVIL costume in the same manner, but he really dug it. Whereas Mr Xtra thought it was a bit weak. Well Mr Xtra came back with a couple of HULK tidbits that are quite disturbing. In fact, they might even lead to infuriating rage disorders... Here ya go...

You probably already heard this, but Ang Lee's Hulk will surely piss off purists (like myself). Banner doesn't transform back and forth as in EVERY OTHER INCARNATION OF THE CHARACTER IN EVERY OTHER MEDIUM!!! Instead, the transformation begins midway through the film and gradually progresses throughout the film until we finally see the completely transformed Hulk in the finale. One of the charms of the Hulk is having a confused and disoriented Bruce Banner wake up amidst crazy destruction in search of clothes. Banner, trying to keep his cool, to contain the savage beast. Where's the payoff in ripping off the FLY remake with a "Brundle-Hulk". Avi Arad is such a dirty w____e.

The Notorious Mr. Xtra

Now you add that with the scoop dished by Corona Coming Attractions that said:

Nolte's character is Dr. David Banner, and that the elder doctor "was also a 'Hulk' along with Bruce."

And suddenly we're looking at not a minor departure... This isn't "The spider is genetically altered and not radiated..." This changes the character at fundamental levels if true.

Now, I've been sitting down here at the house with the Dvd that has Kevin Smith interviewing Stan "The Man" Lee about his part in the creation of the Marvel Universe. In regards to THE HULK he first talks about watching Boris Karloff as the Frankenstein Monster and feeling that he wasn't the monster, but the townspeople with the pitchforks and torches. That he took that and mixed it with his love with DR JEKYLL AND MR HYDE and the Hero archtype to create THE HULK. Suddenly it seems that Ang Lee is changing the character to a gradual transformation that doesn't seem Anger triggered, and without the ability for the character to return to normalcy to regret the damage and horror he's inflicted upon others. To be horrified of what is in him. I can't help but remember early on in Ang Lee's attachment to this project where he said to USA TODAY:

''Scientifically, I am doing an academic study on how a cell can expand and how a person can become a Hulk.

''Technically, I am asking myself, 'How do I create the Hulk?' You can't have a big guy, paint him green and put comic book pants on him. The Hulk is not human. He's 9 to 12 feet tall, 1,500 pounds. I guess I'll go with digital (photorealistic animation).

''Culturally, I need to know, 'Why does it work?' On a psychological level, ''Why is he so popular?' ''

Personally, upon reflection upon these statements I think I see a problem with Ang Lee and this material. Right from the get go he doesn't seem to understand the character. Scientifically understanding how a cell can expand is total and utter bullshit. If ya listen to Stan Lee, he says he wouldn't know a gamma ray from an eggplant, it was just a shortcut, a device... the given. Why does it work? Why is he so popular? It probably has to do with power and regret. The ability to wield such power without any control. It is at the base nature of understanding the basic nature of humanity and its potential for destruction. How we each have an id monster inside of us that can lash out. Stan and Jack Kirby just empowered that inner monster to survive and do anything it could to survive. The mixture of the Karloff FRANKENSTEIN Monster, the Lon Chaney WOLFMAN and March's DR. JEKYLL AND MR HYDE created a character with a literary backbone within pop-conciousness.

And if the rumors are true it seems they are completely throwing that out the window. Does that mean the movie will be terrible?

No. Ang Lee is a powerful filmmaker and like Kubrick with THE SHINING he may be making something possibly more affecting upon the silver screen than even was in the source material that inspired it. But folks, I'm dying to get my hands on this script. This is script number one that I want to read. Let me know if you can help!

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • April 19, 2002, 3:51 a.m. CST

    yay! hulk news!

    by a goonie

    always good. even if it's kinda bad.

  • April 19, 2002, 3:52 a.m. CST

    lee.. you'd better not make me angry..

    by Bejesus wouldn't like me when i'm angry..

  • April 19, 2002, 4 a.m. CST

    Well you see, it's the tale of a large green man...

    by Billy Talent

    Dr David Banner... Duhn-nuh-nuh-nuh

  • if only Ang and co. would read this, and wake up. i've felt from the get-go that Ang is a very INTERESTING choice to helm this movie. but that's not necessarily a good thing. will this movie be more Ride With the Devil or Crouching Tiger, or a hideous hybrid of both? hmmm.

  • April 19, 2002, 4 a.m. CST

    Well you see, it's the tale of a large green man...

    by Billy Talent

    Dr David Banner... Duhn-nuh-nuh-nuh

  • April 19, 2002, 4:03 a.m. CST

    Hulk smash puny Lee!

    by lazymanschair

    My god, all my high hopes for this film have just gone up in smoke. How hard is it to make these films. You have all the back story and characters. You have years of stories to draw from how hard can it fucking be. Lee is a fucking muppet, and if these rumours hold true i am not gonna bother with this movie

  • April 19, 2002, 4:06 a.m. CST

    Bugger this for a joke.

    by Rain_Dog

    I knew it was too good to be true; brilliant director, great cast, CGI technology good enough to bring a 12 foot tall, pissed off Hulk to the screen. Now Lee's gone and fucked it all up (assuming this is true) by not just putting his own spin on it, but totally destroying the thematic base for the character. I wanted this to be an intelligent, character based action movie with the Hulk taking on tanks, planes, the whole frickin' US army then turning back into a scared, confused and guilt stricken Banner. If I wanted to see Cronenberg's 'The Fly' I'd fucking watch it. If the change is gradual, why even have 'Thunderbolt' Ross? AAAHHHHRRGHHHHHHHH!!!! My anger knows no bounds. I'm going to go and put on my purple trousers. By the way, before anyone says "You're such a loser for judging this movie before it comes out, you loser fanboy, why don't you give it a chance, blah blah I'm so reasonable and cultured," allow me to issue a pre-emptive "You guys can eat my ass." This is not Daredevil having some strappy boots or the Kingpin's skin being a different color, this is like filming On The Road and setting it entirely on Jack Kerouac's couch.

  • April 19, 2002, 4:19 a.m. CST

    April Fool's Day was like, 2 1/2 weeks ago...

    by Hung-Wei Lo

    What up wit dis?! Is Ang Lee joking? Sometimes, these "artists" really know how to mess up a good thing. Now, I don't claim to be a Hulk know-it-all, but I grew up with the mythos and knowledge of what he is, and what makes him The Hulk. Next, you'll be telling me that David Banner has a pet white dove that likes to take slow-mo flights in this film.

  • April 19, 2002, 4:23 a.m. CST

    dont know if it's true (why would i) but...

    by BEARison Ford

    i think its funny that this is a project almost everybody thought was a slamdunk when ang lee was announced, whereas it's been nothing but skepticism about sam raimi/spiderman and it looks like ang could potentially do what everybody feared most from sam: ruin a favorite character.

  • April 19, 2002, 4:31 a.m. CST

    The Hulk

    by FrankCastle

    This sounds as if it's shaping up to be shite! How dare they alter such great source material.

  • April 19, 2002, 4:35 a.m. CST


    by Lupe_101

    This is really bad news. More to the point its an insult to the audience. I can see the execs sitting round squeeling "thing is Ang, americans just won't "get" the idea that he changes back and forth.....I mean come on, who reads Jekyll and Hyde these days" The point of the Hulk to reiterate what everyone in the sane universe is saying, is that basically its a retelling of the Jekyll and Hyde story, its fundimentaly about somone who's subconcious desires suddenly grow massive green arms and are allowed to run amuck when he gets angry. If you fuck with that premise then its no longer the Hulk its, as somone else said, the fly. The only way I can see you pulling off such a total change in direction is if Angs planning a sequal, the first film being about how the Hulk came to be, the second concerning Banner trying to deal with sporadically turning into what he becomes at the end of the first film. and frankly Mr film Exec, your audience is going to accept the premise that Banner flips between his too persona's far more readily than they will accept an hour and a half piece of exposition about why it happens before waiting 2 years to watch it smash tanks.

  • April 19, 2002, 4:36 a.m. CST

    Fuckin' Ang Lee...

    by phasmatrope

    How did he even come to be involved in this project? He's trying to figure out the appeal of the character by studying his cell structure? Did anyone read "THE HULK" as a kid and watch his transformation wondering how the fuck his "cells were growing"?? Did we worry about all the green and/or grey pigment that he suddenly acquired? Hell no!!! The answer is right under his fucking nose. Hulk is all about brute carnal rage and the release of the id and kickin' ass!!! What a complete tool Ang Lee is. Still, can't say I'm THAT disappointed with him, as I too thought "Crouching Tiger" was overhyped & overrated self-congratulatory art-house schlock....

  • April 19, 2002, 4:47 a.m. CST

    It made laugh

    by DannyOcean01

    when I heard Lee would be doing this. One of the angriest and instinctual entities in the hands of a zen filmmaker. This was a big mistake from the start. At least it will be beautifully shot and very well acted.

  • April 19, 2002, 5:06 a.m. CST

    Why I love Geeks

    by Rhett Butler

    The shameless honesty of comic buying/creating folk eludes Hollywood. To us, it matters not a jot about a logical underpinning for the HULK

  • April 19, 2002, 5:09 a.m. CST

    ever notice how 99.99% of the characters stan lee came up with i

    by Chishu_Ryu

    i think that's one of the problems of bringing these classic marvel characters to the screen. their origins were so entrenched in the atomic age that now that we're all a little smarter, these origins seem a little silly. nuclear physics is a messy subject in reality and no longer the stuff of science fiction. i mean, we all know that radiation bombardment doesn't directly mutate us into super-heroes, it gives us cancer and we die. dc lucked out with its characters. superman's an alien, albeit an anglo-saxon alien, but okay. batman trained himself, fine. wonder woman's an amazon, great. flash got hit with lightning and chemical x, whatever. but the marvel house of ideas, in trying to be current, ended up being passe. so how do you bring these old marvel characters to a modern smarter movie audience? not just sci-fi movie geeks, but the masses of average lay-filmgoers and handfuls of science majors who are quick to call bullshit? you can't just expect them to automatically suspend their dis-belief just 'cause it's "the hulk." the origins have to be brought up to date. they had to do it with the 70s tv hulk. nobody tested atomic bombs in the desert anymore, so they had to bring it into the laboratory. nowadays, atomic testing and radiation is such a non-issue (with the exception of rad waste dumping), that the hulk's original origin will have even less resonance, which i think was one reason the american godzilla failed to resonate with modern audiences. the original godzilla himself was a spawn of the 50s atomic age. (sidenote: the only way they could pull off the atomic bomb origin would be to make the film have a retro atomic age feel and the only filmmaker i can think that could pull that off successfully is tim burton, and that would be cool, in the desert and everything, too) so anyway, changes need to be made to the origin if it's to be played straight and thus have any ring of legitimacy. so you go ang lee, brilliant talented moviemaker that you are, do what you must. just keep him green, keep him mean, give him some heart, and i think you'll have done your part! and that's my two cents worth.

  • April 19, 2002, 5:15 a.m. CST

    Have more faith in Ang Lee

    by Grand Digital

    Holy Jeebus. Stop whining. Ang Lee is a talented and clever director, and he seems to have a mischevious sense of the audacious - I remember the half gasps/half laughs from the audience when everyone started flying around in Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon...This different spin on the Hulk story ( if it's true ) sounds like another unexpected angle. If it was coming from a lesser director it could be worrying, but I trust Ang Lee's talent. It sounds interesting. Go For It, Ang Lee!

  • April 19, 2002, 5:32 a.m. CST

    I hate to say I told you so

    by Buck Teeth Soh

    but while we're on about respct for source material, let me enlighten you. In all five books by Wang Dulu, Li Mu Bai DOESN'T DIE. Not once. So Hong Kong movie fans were underwhelmed by CTHD, and now superhero movie fans will be underwhelmed by the Hulk. Oh yeah, my girlfriend is a Jane Austen fan, and she was underwhelmed by Sense and Sensibility. At least it will be beautifully shot and very well acted. (quote copyright DannyOcean01)

  • April 19, 2002, 5:43 a.m. CST

    He just don't get it

    by Cash-Money

    I don't think Ang Lee knows what the hell he's getting into. That is, I can believe he can craft a film that is poignant and a metaphor for mankind's blah blah blah, but it kinda sounds like he's making a more touching Teen-Wolf. And why does he feel the need to explain the science of the Hulks tranformation? It's not like his last movie had folks dance-fighting on the top of bamboo forests.

  • April 19, 2002, 5:54 a.m. CST

    Ang Lee Rocks!!!

    by euphonium

    The guy is good. I know nothing about "The Hulk" and so I don't care what he does to it. I will see it because of Eric Bana and because Lee directed "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" and "The Ice Storm". The latter being a truly kick-arse movie. Seriously, have you seen it? What a film.

  • April 19, 2002, 6:20 a.m. CST

    Listen up you sons of bitches

    by Vern

    I can't believe all you newsies today. Harry says right at the beginning that THIS REPORT IS NOT TRUE, the Hulk does not slowly transform throughout the movie. Then he takes one quote about Ang Lee studying cell structure (which in context made everybody say "Wow, Ang Lee's really goin in to the details on this one."). Suddenly, you've all decided that the movie is bad. BASED ON NO EVIDENCE AT ALL. It makes no sense. Personally, I don't read children's comic strips but I do think a movie starring CHOPPER from the director of CROUCHING TIGER, ETC. will probaly be good. You can paint the dude green, I don't care, he's a great fuckin actor. I only hope the real Chopper gets a cameo in there somewhere. thanks boys. Vern

  • April 19, 2002, 6:49 a.m. CST


    by DannyOcean01

    Ever heard of updates. This wasn't there when people originally posted. So calm down and stop sounding like you've uncovered a plot to kill God or something.

  • April 19, 2002, 7:01 a.m. CST

    See What I Mean?

    by FanHalen

    I told you all that Hollywood knows to do is to fuck up comic-books!

  • April 19, 2002, 7:47 a.m. CST

    Don't make me Ang Lee....

    by Chilli Kramer

    You wouldn't like me when I'm Ang Lee! Someone had to say it. Why's Ang Lee trying to find a rational explanation for the Hulk's creation? You wouldn't do it for Jekyll/ Hyde or for Frankenstein's monster. You shouldn't for this, its only a comic book. OK, so you can't say 'gamma ray' or 'nuclear test', instead you move on to 'a chemical serum' or 'genetic experimentation'. But not in any detail, not so people can pick holes in it. Look at Frankenstein, the original book. Mary Shelley didn't bother explaining origin: she made Dr Frankenstein disgusted at what he'd done, so he never told us. Bruce Banner could maybe get amnesia, or they could just ignore the issue entirely, saying 'It's too complicated to easily explain, in fact I barely understand it myself'. Stan the Man's Marvel heroes were all radioctive as someone mentioned. except Thor, who picked up a magical stick. in the 'Origins' book they even made fun of this, they new they were doing it, but didn't care, it worked, it wasn't worth dwelling on.

  • April 19, 2002, 7:55 a.m. CST


    Jeez....At the end of the day you geekboys are going to go see it.....SUCKERS! 'How can ang lee destroy an original peice of work?!' OH PLEEEEZE! A green guy running about going uuuuuurrrgh!ORIGINAL?UNIQUE?.....uh no! DATED...CORNY? most definatly!

  • April 19, 2002, 8:19 a.m. CST


    by Jon Zuckerman

    Too bad the script that was reviewed for Coronas COming Attractions didnt get greenlighted. This is gonna blow

  • April 19, 2002, 8:24 a.m. CST


    by LeeScoresby

    let the fanboy bitching begin....this is what i mean...unconfirmed, ultimately false info gets chewed over and the whole movie gets dismissed because some bitter guy (and he IS bitter after his last two reports) writes in

  • April 19, 2002, 8:31 a.m. CST

    Angel's Egg or whatever

    by Rain_Dog

    It always deeply amuses me when someone who makes the effort to get a Talkback identity and post here calls other people 'geekboy'. Your glib discription of the Hulk makes you look like a knob, and its not going to change anyone's mind, so all I'll say is this: CLEVER? WITTY? OBNOXIOUS? HYPOCRITICAL? Definitely.

  • April 19, 2002, 8:47 a.m. CST


    by themidnighter23

    if this is true, this is stupid. Has anyone notice that whenever comic is rebooted, gets a new artistic team, turned into a cartoon, or turned into a comic for kids? THEY GO BACK TO BASICS. What makes the character tick. What makes it work. Look how the created Batman into a cartoon. BASIC BATMAN, without the continuety baggage. Superman, samething. Spider-man, The HUlk cartoon, I could go on. The simple fact is that in order for a comicbook film to be success, you must get to the core of the book. Bruce Banner was an abused child, he grows up and Becomes a successful scientist and creates something great and dangerous. Through his work he causes an accident which only he could fix, but with a consequence. After the accident, he discovers that he has changed, his inner rage has manifested itself. It's changed him into a monster. He must figure out a way to control this, and cure himself. In the end, he discovers that it was all the guilt and pain that he has hidden since he was a child is the monster. The HUlk isn't a monster, it's his inner child screaming for help, screaming for love. THAT IS WHAT THE INCREDIBLE HULK IS.

  • April 19, 2002, 8:47 a.m. CST

    "It's not easy bein' green"

    by JAGUART

    The Hulk storyline is passe in the New Millenium. The moment Banner turns into the Hulk for the first time and lashes out, he'll be labeled a psychopath and receive jail time and forced to pay restitution. Upon his release he'll be court ordered to report to a parole officer and attend anger management classes. If he comes within 500 feet of any females he'll be throw back in the slammer. Banner will lose everything to his ex-bitch wife who claims "He raised a closed green fist to her" in the divorce proceedings. He'll spend the the rest of his life dating dumb waitresses and retail stock chicks who think he just has a "roid problem" and a good heart.

  • April 19, 2002, 8:48 a.m. CST


    by TomVee

    Ang Lee doing THE HULK? God forfend. All I can say is the character better be at least nine feet tall, four feet wide and green all over. And no CGI, dammit! And no green Beatle wig this time around! I always preferred the Hulk with the Frankenstein flattop. As to who should play Bruce Banner -- hey, isn't that actor dead? Bill Bixby, right? How can they possibly make this movie with Bixby six feet under? Maybe they can use old segments from the TV show and previous movies! Maybe they can use the Daredevil costume from that Hulk on trial movie for Ben Who-Flack.

  • April 19, 2002, 8:52 a.m. CST


    by themidnighter23

    if this is true, this is stupid. Has anyone notice that whenever comic is rebooted, gets a new artistic team, turned into a cartoon, or turned into a comic for kids? THEY GO BACK TO BASICS. What makes the character tick. What makes it work. Look how the created Batman into a cartoon. BASIC BATMAN, without the continuety baggage. Superman, samething. Spider-man, The HUlk cartoon, I could go on. The simple fact is that in order for a comicbook film to be success, you must get to the core of the book. Bruce Banner was an abused child, he grows up and Becomes a successful scientist and creates something great and dangerous. Through his work he causes an accident which only he could fix, but with a consequence. After the accident, he discovers that he has changed, his inner rage has manifested itself. It's changed him into a monster. He must figure out a way to control this, and cure himself. In the end, he discovers that it was all the guilt and pain that he has hidden since he was a child is the monster. The HUlk isn't a monster, it's his inner child screaming for help, screaming for love. THAT IS WHAT THE INCREDIBLE HULK IS.

  • April 19, 2002, 8:56 a.m. CST

    I dunno, Ang Lee's take sounds a heckuva lot more interestin

    by Andy Travis

    Purists can read their comics and be happy. I'm not going to argue the abilities of Ang (Ice Storm, Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon) Lee. Especially against Mr. Stan (most of my cleverest ideas weren't actually mine) Lee.

  • April 19, 2002, 9:01 a.m. CST

    San Francisco?


    What about the desert? Hulk love desert.Cactus Hulk's friend.Hulk not want to live in Castro district.Chinatown O.K.though. Hulk like lo mein.

  • April 19, 2002, 9:15 a.m. CST

    Even Worse...........

    by FanHalen is stating that untalented director, McRib-I mean-McG, wants Brendan Frazier to ruin his SuperMan movie.

  • April 19, 2002, 9:35 a.m. CST

    Hulk Loyalist

    by mrzsasz

    I own every goddamn issue of The Incredible Hulk. EVERY. GODDAMN. ONE. Plus all offshoot material. I sold my entire comic collection, except for this stuff, and I have no problem with what Ang is doing. It should be obvious that he's holding very, very close to Stan's Jekyll/Hyde influence, moreso than the Frankenstein motif. From what Jim Schamus has said, plus this information, I can gather that the Hulk is going to move in transformations. Probably starting off as the Grey misanthrope, and by the end, becoming the mindless green brute. Grey Hulk is smaller, more human-like, and very Mr. Hyde. This is probably what the above "Brundle-Hulk" will actually turn out to be. Green Hulk is simply Frankenstein's monster. Looking at it from a character standpoint, Banner's Grey Hulk will manifest from his torment from Ross and Talbot, (the military), while Green Hulk will stem deeper from his subconsciousness, - being abused by his father. There will be parallel's between Ross and Banner's father, maybe having to do with the "loss" of a loving female figure, (Banner's mother and Betty Ross), by their hands, which will be the triggers. The true fundamental change Ang is making is with the removal of Rick Jones. By having Banner do this to himself, (self-experimentation), willingly, it removes any vestage of Banner/The Hulk's "hero" traits,(which is what made the TV show so popular), and makes him purely tragic, (I'm wondering if Doc Samson will make an apperance, since he's a psych). Ang Lee's Banner will have more in common with Donnie Darko than Smallville's Clark Kent. What is a shame, is Ang and Co. have seemed to miss the Hulk's true, core symbolism - war.Especially post 9/11, they could have made a real statement. Oh well. I still say Cronenberg should have been the director/writer.

  • April 19, 2002, 9:48 a.m. CST

    Pay Attention

    by Rodan

    For people who skim the text and then fire off an angry opinion - here is what Harry's intro to the scoop says: "THANKFULLY... he transforms much like he does in the books, very Jekyll and Hyde, but apparently as the film moves forward his anger and control issues grow more and more out of hand resulting in larger and even less human HULKING OUT, but he always reverts eventually back to Banner. So that clarifies two rumors right away."

  • April 19, 2002, 9:56 a.m. CST

    A gradual transformation works better for me.

    by Christopher3

    'Cause if it's just going to be hulking-out-and-going-back-to-normal pacing, you're going to wind up with a "martial arts syndrome," wherein the audience waits for that sort of shit to happen, and looks at their watch the rest of the time.

  • April 19, 2002, 9:58 a.m. CST

    Ang Lee & Stan Lee

    by Ocsan

    Did Ang Lee asked Stan Lee's opinion about this? If not, then that can be a problem... Maybe we will see the Hulk fanatics trying to... "hang" Ang Lee!

  • April 19, 2002, 9:58 a.m. CST

    P.S. Brendan Fraser's fine for Supes. McG isn't.

    by Christopher3

    Fraser'll do fine since he does the nerdy-to-heroic transformation so well. Unfortunately, McG will probably have him lip sync to Weezer or something for the theme song.

  • April 19, 2002, 9:59 a.m. CST


    by FanHalen

    Get another unknown for Superman! It worked with Chris Reeve.

  • April 19, 2002, 10 a.m. CST

    That's the problem with Frazier

    by FanHalen

    He's already "been there, done that" playing these roles!

  • April 19, 2002, 10:03 a.m. CST

    When did Bruce Banner become David Banner?

    by Dr. Sid Schaefer

    Am I crazy, or wasn't the original comic book character named "Bruce"?

  • April 19, 2002, 10:04 a.m. CST

    David Vs.Bruce

    by FanHalen

    Wasn't he "David" in the TV series?

  • April 19, 2002, 10:15 a.m. CST

    Kubrick's Shining

    by Flint420

    Kubrick's Shining SUCKED! I love the book and I like some of Kubrick's work but I didn't like the Shining. Kubrick was overrated, in my opinion. I really enjoyed the 3-part mini-movie ABC put out about 6 years ago starring Steven Webber and Rebecca DeMornay it was creepy cool.

  • April 19, 2002, 10:35 a.m. CST

    David vs Bruce, and Superman casting

    by Chilli Kramer

    Bruce Banner became David Bruce Banner for TV because execs thought 'Bruce' made him seem gay (Bruce Lee? Willis? Campbell? Springsteen? Wayne? none of 'em gay, like it matters anyway). Interestingly, newish comic 'The Ultimates', a sort of Marvel 'elseworlds' tale, has him named Robert Bruce Banner. Weird. And you know who they should cast as Superman? Bruce Campbell. Seriously. Not in the McG project though. Cast him as an older Superman in a version of The Dark Knight Returns. With Harrison Ford as the bat. Now THERE'S a superhero movie!

  • April 19, 2002, 10:42 a.m. CST

    Bruce vs. David vs. Bob

    by Strawhenge

    He was Bruce Banner in the first Hulk stories. But in the classic Fantastic Four #25, he becomes Bob Banner. No kidding. Apparently, Stan had a hard time keeping his characters' names straight, even with the awesome alliteration. An alert reader spotted this inconsistency, at which point Lee quickly established that the character's FULL name was Robert Bruce Banner (yeah, that's the ticket!). Later, on the TV series, the character was called "David" (although his full name David Bruce Banner appears on the headstone during the opening credits). I don't know the reason for this change.

  • April 19, 2002, 10:43 a.m. CST

    Good Picks for Senior Supes

    by FanHalen

    Too bad the "World's Finest" project has been shelved....

  • April 19, 2002, 10:45 a.m. CST

    I Have Faith In Ang Lee, But I Don't Want It to Get To Sci-t

    by The Founder

    I'm serious, I don't want a huge f$cking explaination about why he transform, or why cells expand, it's the Hulk, no one's going to see the Hulk for thought provoking scientific explainations. Don't get me wrong I don't want it to be stupid, I want some logical facts, but Lee doesn't need to get to deep into it. I don't see a problem with the military having Banner testing new weapons for them, and the result in charting around in dangerous territory is him becoming the Hulk. Some form of serum or genetic testing in a lab has been tried for a ton of human into moster stories. The Hulk is an irradiated monster, and I want to see something involving gamma radiation, it's part of who the Hulk is. It seems as if Lee is drawing from the boring tv show, and god I hope it's not true about Banner's father being some kind of Hulk as well, because I remember an episode where their was a older Hulk, though he wasn't Banner's father, he was a Hulk as well, and I don't want to see that rehashed on the big screen. That Hulk tv show is the wrong place to draw any influence from. I hope Lee sticks to the oringinal origin, but updates it for the times.

  • April 19, 2002, 10:51 a.m. CST

    "Hulk sad."

    by rabid_republican

    Glad I read the updated version of this report. I agree part of the Hulk mythos' charm is the Banner waking up confused and disoriented. What's interesting nowadays is having him ALWAYS stay the Hulk in the books, which has been a staple of the character for over a decade. Be curious to see if they'd try doing this in a sequel. Otherwise, let's just say the idea of a gradual transformation did not sit well with this comic book fan.

  • April 19, 2002, 11:03 a.m. CST

    "Boy, ye got the Shinning in ye!"

    by Brother Putney

    Kubrick's "Shining," while a great and entertaining movie, is a complete re-imagining of the book and a massive simplification, too (moreso than most films adapted from other sources by serious directors). King's novel is really more about four distinct characters, alcoholism, responsibility, guilt and time, and I think that makes it better. Sorry, don't mean to post off-topic but... hey, Harry started it when he picked on The Shining. Damn, I wish I had a Coke in the fridge.

  • April 19, 2002, 11:05 a.m. CST

    re: 99% character history

    by Kraken

    Well, if you really look at the Marvel character histories, 99% don't really come from direct radiation. IT wasn't like any of them walked by a leaking reactor and all of a sudden could fly and pop claws out of their hands. X-MEn were genetic mutants of the human species (no radiation), Banner was doing experiments WITH radiation as one of the tools (like a lot of science does)much like Spiderman was bitten by a spider that had been experimented on with radiation and god only knows what else. But, in the Spiderman comic books they are hinting now that the Spider was a magic spider that decided to give Peter it's powers before it died of the radiation... and my comment on why the HULK works is because people want to see someone puny get picked on and then turn into a giant ASS-KICKER because that's what all of us geeks wish we could have done when we were being picked on in school.

  • April 19, 2002, 11:24 a.m. CST


    by DannyOcean01

    You pay attention. Harry's comments were updated. As you can tell by the word UPDATED. Many people were reacting to the news before the update.

  • April 19, 2002, 12:26 p.m. CST

    Actually, I'm curious to see what Ang Lee will do, could be

    by minderbinder

    Since when does the director of a "cartoon" movie have to be schlocky?

  • April 19, 2002, 12:37 p.m. CST

    Trust in Ang Lee like you trusted Peter Jackson

    by IAmLegolas

    Looks like Ang Lee is making it more character driven, story first. Sounds pretty interesting actually, instead of the standard comic adaption where we will see action scenes every 10 minutes. Doesn't sound like it would be Crouching Hulk, Hidden Banner either, which is a good thing. (We don't need Hulk wire work fighting). Hey, maybe this will actually be a Academy Award nominated comic book adaption!

  • April 19, 2002, 12:41 p.m. CST


    by superhero

    Just give us the character we know and love not some lame assed idea that you came up with and tagged "THE HULK" name onto! WHY OH WHY do filmmakers automatically assume that people won't accept certain fantastical elements in a film if WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE GOING IN TO SEE! If I'm going to see a movie called THE HULK then I pretty much know what I'm in for, fantasy elements included. Why does it have to be intellectualized to death? He gets pumped up by Gamma Rays, is a supressive child abuse survivor, and turns into a big green monster when his suppressed rage rears its ugly head! IF A FILMMAKER KNOWS WHAT HE IS DOING THEN HE WILL BE ABLE TO PRESENT THESE ELEMENTS SO THEY ALLOW THE AUDIENCE TO SUSPEND ITS DISBELIEF! I mean people are gonna know what they're going in to see! Do you think that by making the transformation gradual that people will say, "Oh, yes, that's much more believable!" HEY MORONS! PEOPLE WHO ARE DOSED UP WITH SEVERE AMOUNTS OF RADIATION DIE! THEY DON'T TURN INTO OR TRANSFORM INTO ANYTHING! THE AUDIENCE KNOWS THIS! So you think that by making it a slow burn change over two hours the audience will be more accepting of it? Ridiculous! They're going into a theatre to suspend their disbelief in the first place and if you know how to make the film then they'll believe WHAT YOU SHOW THEM NO MATTER WHAT IT IS! Jesus, I had high hopes for this but this bit of news pretty much guarantees that this movie will be a huge disappointment to any fan of the comic book! It may be a good movie but it certainly won't be The Hulk...

  • April 19, 2002, 12:44 p.m. CST

    Wonder if the ending...

    by Kid Z

    ... Will have Hulk, for no discernable reason, dive off a footbridge and float gently through fog-draped Chinese mountain scenery?

  • April 19, 2002, 12:46 p.m. CST

    ang lee, your messing with the wrong people will not


    wats the friggin deal with this shit. banners father....a hulk himself..noooooooo. a gradual transformation...nooooooooo,i want to see the hulk ripping buildings to shreds for godds sakr then reverting to human and cryin about it.

  • April 19, 2002, 1:17 p.m. CST

    Um, Ritalin much?

    by snicky

    Dude ... chill.

  • April 19, 2002, 1:19 p.m. CST

    Kid Z ... Hee!

    by snicky

  • April 19, 2002, 1:22 p.m. CST

    whatever happened to the buildup?

    by Chishu_Ryu

  • April 19, 2002, 1:38 p.m. CST


    by mferrell3

    I love how 99% of posters on this board automatically bash anything that any creator changes about your exalted icons whenever you haven't even read the emm-effing script. Everyone says, "wHy do U have to make it more reals? Zuspension of reality, bitchaz" If you don't more people are going to hate the movie because of precisely that. Comics are evolving and fans need to as well. Also, someone mentioned that in the sequel, maybe they would leave him as the Hulk the whole time because that's been his staple for a decade or so. What? Marvel got rid of that and turned him back into Dr. Banner/Mr. Hyde a couple of years ago after the Onslaught saga I believe.

  • April 19, 2002, 1:41 p.m. CST

    Trust hollywood and its ass kissers

    by Someguywithaname

    If they decided to give the Hulk organic "gamma goo" shooters in his pecs, then all the Hollywood ass kissers will say: "Oh! It's genius! An audience can believe that a liquid metal terminator could exist, even an alien from the planet Krypton who looks totally human---but mechanical webshooters, or a man who can change into a green monster? No way. An audience would never believe that. Same reason they have to make Adam Strange a 12-year old boy. Wasnt Captain America way way better by making the Red Skull an Italian witha tomato nose instead of a German? Hollywood and its ass kissers know best. Trust in them.

  • April 19, 2002, 1:48 p.m. CST

    Appropos of nothing, didn't the origin of The Incredible Hul

    by Village Idiot

    Big bomb, guy tries to save other guy in blast, gets irradiated, becomes big monster guy. Which came first, The Hulk, or The Amazing Colossal Man?******Meanwhile, speaking as comic fan who only owns 2 Hulks (from the early eighties no less), I echo the poster superhero's frustration with the watering down of superheroes (and superhero fantasy) when they make the jump to the big screen. Good stuff is lost. Damn shame. Thankfully Spider-Man looks fan-freaking-tastic.

  • April 19, 2002, 1:52 p.m. CST

    whatever happened to the buildup?

    by Chishu_Ryu

    in our drive-thru push-button quicker is better instant gratification culture of today, i think something got lost. what about foreplay? the best part of a burdgeoning relationship is the courtship. okay, sex on the first date might be fun, but where's the imagination in that? the playfulness? the romance? this wham-bam thank you m'am mentality seems to have seeped over into the movie industry. in the matt broderick godzilla, they show the frickin' lizard in the first five minutes! no buildup, no suspense, no foreplay, just sex on the first night. let's put the builup back in the box office! i like the idea that ang lee will make the hulk's transformation a gradual thing. sort of reminds me of the claude rains invisible man's slow descent into madness. to have hulk smash in the first five minutes will leave you with two hours of soap operatics and further mindless action reminiscent of the aforementioned godzilla. what else is new? i think one key to making a great film is to not give the audience what they want. in batman, tim burton could have done the obvious thing and cast a rock hudson/cary grant lookalike in the role of bruce wayne, but he put in michael keaton (much to the anti-behest of fandom), and made a classic. tim burton is not ang lee, but they are both very talented, and make very good movies. i have faith! so you go ang lee! show us something new, show us something interesting, and save the fireworks until the end! just make sure the cgi makes jurassic park look like land of the lost, don't forget that the hulk is actually a human being who has a woman that loves him, and you might make a classic! and that's my two cents worth.

  • April 19, 2002, 1:58 p.m. CST

    If they change the Hulk, I won't be going!

    by Norm3

    These reports are truning me off to this movie. The Hulk has 35 years of history, DON'T F**K WITH IT LEE!

  • Personally, I thought the father vs. son storyline would fit right in with the substext established by Peter David in the comicbook (and even used in the TV series! remember that episode when Banner visits his estranged dad?). And I thought it would have been a nice touch to have Nick Nolte's character called "David" Banner -- but anytime something sounds fanboyishly cool I assume it's just a lie and not true. We'll wait and see. Now all this hoopla about Bruce Banner changing "gradually" into the Hulk. Sounds like nonsense to me -- and I think you're all putzes for believing it without even seeing a script yet. Harry seems to have figured it out: the "gradual metamorphosis" probably means that every time he changes into the Hulk, the creature will be bigger and meaner and more monstrous. How cool would that me, true-believers! The first incarnation, he could be grayish and look like Lou Ferrigno from the TV series, just a bodybuilder type psycho. But then next time he changes he could be bigger and greener and look more like the comic book monster -- until finally during the climactic battle he could be the biggest baddest Hulk we've ever imagined. HAVE FAITH. I trust Ang Lee's story-telling ability. I was a fan of the Hulk, and even loved the television series even though they strayed from the comic book a lot (no gamma bomb, the Hulk didn't talk, no Thunderbolt Ross, no Rick Jones, no Betty, David instead of Bruce, Mr. McGee the tabloid journalist instead of the army chasing the Hulk's ass, etc.) -- even with all those changes, and even though the series was flawed, I STILL LOVED IT, mostly because of Bill Bixby's performance and the fact that the writers made me care about the CHARACTER of Dr. Banner. That's what it's all about. So I don't expect Ang Lee's film to be a 100% retelling of the comic -- I just want it to be freakin' GOOD. And I believe from what I've heard so far about casting and little tidbits that this movie will indeed be good. It could be the first comicbook movie that might actually draw audiences that don't really care for comic-book movies. In other words, it could be a COOL MOVIE (PERIOD) instead of just a cool "superhero" movie. HULK SMASH YOU NAYSAYERS OF DOOM! 'Nuff said.

  • April 19, 2002, 2:05 p.m. CST

    Hulk WILL transform back and forth

    by TNO821

    I guarantee that Ang and company will have Banner transform to AND from the Hulk. Since the Hulk is going to be 100% CG, there's NO WAY that they've got the budget to keep him the Hulk 24/7 (unless we're talking about some CRAPPY CG). And can you imagine how expensive sequels would then be? And that doesn't even take into account how poor the story would be without the duality of Banner and Hulk. And NOBODY is dumb enough to have Banner's father be an OG Hulk...that would be utterly retarded. I'm guessing it'll be a quasi "like father like son" scientific self-experimentation angle, but Nolte will NOT be a Hulk (atleast not physically). mferrell3 is correct, Marvel did revert the Hulk to the Jekyll/Hyde story angle a couple of years ago. A big reason for this was pressure to bring the comic more in-line with what the movie will be like. Now, I'm not oppossed to a Hulk movie where Banner doesn't transform to and from the Hulk...I am oppossed to the FIRST Hulk movie being this way. The only way it worked in the comic was b/c of the years of rich back-story which had already taken place (and Peter David's amazing writing skills). I can't see it working on the big screen until atleast the second sequel, if that ever happens.

  • April 19, 2002, 2:39 p.m. CST

    Who cares about The Hulk anyway? I read/collected comics-I never

    by Tarl_Cabot

    I say he's uninteresting because he's like a mini Godzilla-he just goes around and destroys shit(but people never get killed) but unlike G he has no adversaries of equal power.I wish Ang Lee had picked Daredevil(before MSJ) ,Dr.Strange, Thor, Ironman or Silver Surfer-I could go on and on...anyone of these comics would be a cooler movie over "The Hulk".

  • April 19, 2002, 2:41 p.m. CST

    Isn't this where everyone is supposed to say...

    by Vicconius

    ... that Ang Lee raped their childhood, and possibly their father's childhood.

  • April 19, 2002, 3:25 p.m. CST

    Tarl - Your answer

    by Strawhenge

    You're absolutely right, Tarl. The Hulk sucks. Unless you happen to like him. In which case the Hulk is pretty cool. Your distillation of the Hulk's many adventures ("he just goes around and destroys shit") is a bit simplistic. There's usually a good reason for the Hulk's rampages. No adversaries of equal power? Well, that's a tough one. Thor gave him a pretty good run for his money, as did the Juggernaut, Rhino, Bi-Beast, and Abomination just off the top of my head. Speaking of Thor, b-o-o-ring! Shakespeare with a croquet mallet. Dr. Strange? Mandrake without the top hat. And Silver Surfer? Please. Brian Wilson with a spit shine. Sorry, but those characters suck. Unless you happen to like them. In which, forget it.

  • April 19, 2002, 3:50 p.m. CST

    Tarl_Cabot, you should give the Hulk comic a chance

    by TNO821

    The most recent run of the Hulk comic is shaping up nicely (although John Byrne's earlier run was pretty bad). But if you want to see why we like this character, you must read Peter David's take on the Hulk. I'd suggest some early Peter David issues starting at issue 331. From there until issue 345 is one of the best Hulk story-arcs ever. Now I think these issues may be a bit pricy due to it being very early Todd McFarlane art work, but believe me, it's a great read. I recently picked up a couple of reprint books, "The Essential Hulk" Vol. 1 & 2. These are the earliest Hulk comics reprinted (we're talking mid to late 1960's) Holy CRAP, these stories are so much better than I expected. If you can look past some of the dated sci-fi terminology and anti-soviet propaganda, you'll find that these stories do an amazing job of characterizing Bruce Banner and the Hulk (a much better job than was done in the comic during the 70's and early 80's IMO). And if you want to see the Hulk have his ass handed to him, pick up The Incredible Hulk: Future Imperfect. It truly highlights that the Hulk is his own worst enemy.

  • April 19, 2002, 3:54 p.m. CST

    Strawhenge: Nice effort -ok, I did not read the Hulk so I'm

    by Tarl_Cabot

    Dr.Strange and Ironman were pretty cool. I'd much rather see those characters adapted before I see the Hulk(it's been done already). Daredevil is in production so that's a mute point but Ang Lee would have raised my expectations. I have have a soft spot for The Silver Surfer because I surf but I was never as big a fan as I am for other characters- maybe you're right about him not being very adaptable. Anyway, The Hulk does get a good tussle from Thor but that would make Thor the more interesting character of the movie; the Juggernaught belongs to future X-men movies(I hope). As far as I know the Hulk's only nemesis in this movie is the military-just like "Godzilla".

  • April 19, 2002, 3:57 p.m. CST


    by snicky

    Angelina Jolie, David Bowie, Drew Barrymore and Michael Stipe are all up for the role ... developing.

  • April 19, 2002, 4:16 p.m. CST

    Heading about this the wrong way...

    by Benandanti

    The point of the Hulk wasn't the whole sci-fi background, I mean the Hulk always existed in the back of Banner's mind, the blast just unleashed it. That's why none of Banner's experiments to turn himself back never worked, the root of the problem was Banner himself and not the radiation, likewise, the root of the film isn't molecule counting trying to justify the Hulk's existance, and at the opposite end, it isn't just about a not-so-jolly green giant on the warpath, it's about a guy wracked with guilt for something he has no control over, and clutching at straws to put things right. Not science, not savegery, but the fact that Banner and Hulk are two desperate creatures at the opposite ends of the spectrum is what'll interest people the most. What'll make the film a hit isn't the techno-jargon, or the computer generated effects, it's striking a chord with the audience about the tragedy of the characters, two different sides of the same person, unable to accept each other. That tends to be the thing in Hollywood anyway, playing up the humanity angle, time will tell if it'll work though, but if it doesn't have a "Hulk Smash!!!!" or a "You won't like me when I'm angry", I probably won't watch it.

  • April 19, 2002, 4:43 p.m. CST


    by Mac Styran

    Ang Lee, Stan Lee, Bruce Lee, David Bruce Lee, Silent Bob Banner ... who cares? I want to see a big bad mean green Hulk transforming at least 4 times in the movie. And I (the fuck) don't care about Bruces family. Nolte: shove off! My 2002 cents

  • April 19, 2002, 5:34 p.m. CST

    All you stupid fuckers make me very sad

    by MrPeanut

    I mean, come ON. We haven't even seen a picture or read the script yet, and already people are claiming this movie as a failure based on one or two obcure reports by some aynonomous asshole, which HARRY HIMSELF JUST SAID ARE PROBABLY UNTRUE. Why are you angry at Ang Lee? The guy stepped up and gave credibility to a project which could have been utter cheese, and which he certainly didn't need, and all you can do is bitch about how he MIGHT change the story from the original one that was written several decades ago. ARe you all that sad? Hollywood is finally catering to fanboys, and all you can do is sit in your basement clutching your polybagged back-issues and crying "No! The Hulk MUST be exactly as Stan The Man Envisioned or I'm not watching it! Gwen Stacy has to be in Spider-Man or it will suck! Hugh Jackman is too tall to be Wolverine!" If you really feel that strongly about it then please, stay home and let the rest of us enjoy what might actually be a good film, even if it doesn't treat the original comics like the Old Testament itself.

  • April 19, 2002, 8:24 p.m. CST

    Is Daredevil still blind?

    by Smurfette

    Whatever. It's rare they get it right.

  • April 19, 2002, 9:24 p.m. CST

    Why rail against Lee for altering "Hulk" when Marvel itself mess

    by Christopher3

    Any criticism about Lee destroying the alleged "fidelity" of the "Hulk" is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

  • April 19, 2002, 10:56 p.m. CST

    If the script is anything like what they're doing with the I

    by superninja

    The current run teased you with the appearance of the Hulk, up until a recent issue (the current run of the Incredible Hulk is highly recommended - this coming from a person that really isn't into the Hulk much). It was very effective for building up the dramatic tension to see reports of the Hulk in the news, Banner's own inner torture, and knowing he was turning into the Hulk without showing it in an obvious manner (for instance, Banner was hiding in a slum in Chicago, and comes across a young boy that is being picked on by drug dealers for not running their goods. Banner runs into the dealers in an alley, and they threaten to kick his ass, Banner gives a cocky smile, knowing that when they beat him, exactly what they're going to unleash - his own brand of justice. The aftermath of the scene is later depicted showing glimpses of the Hulk on the news). Maybe I'm off base, but my problem with many movies is that they show too much too soon. I like the idea of being teased with seeing Banner Hulk-out in a grand finale. Especially when the CGI is still, on a certain level, going to be limited. I think not focusing on the Hulk, and focusing on Banner is a better way to create sympathy for Banner, which is ultimately more important than seeing HULK SMASH. At least if you want a sequel. Look at the comics - there are only so many interesting ways to see Hulk destroy shit, unless you want him to become a secondary character.

  • April 19, 2002, 11:15 p.m. CST

    Just reading the Talkbacks...

    by superninja

    A lot of you are missing the potential of bringing the Hulk to the big screen. It's not about the Hulk, it's about Banner - it always has been. I'm not a huge fan of the Hulk, but his origin story set up the Jekyl-Hyde thing, and then made it all about Hyde. Everything in the title is either melodrama with Banner, or his Hyde side becoming more or even less intelligent. I urge all of you who are down on this idea to read the Incredible Hulk run that's happening right now. It demonstrates how the Hulk can be more than just a bash-the-shit-out-of-stuff action character. It's about Banner. For the first time reading the Hulk in comics, I actually sympathize with Banner, and am more interested in him than the Hulk. Read it, love it, see the future of Hulk!

  • April 20, 2002, 5:45 a.m. CST

    We all know Ang Lee only got the job 'cause he's Stan Le

    by enigmainyourhead

    Ha, that'd be funny. Frankly, I don't get the big freakin' Ang Lee deal. He did one sorta cool kung fu romance after a string of boring, slow crap (Don't name a movie "Ride with the Devil" when it's more like "Sleep in a cozy treehouse down the street from the devil". I only watched it to the end for that Geoffrey fella and Johnathon Rhys Meyers, Jay Mewes' evil twin brother).

  • April 20, 2002, 11:43 a.m. CST

    Your daily perspective pill

    by pedant

    It's a comic book movie. Don't wet yourselves.

  • April 20, 2002, 2:31 p.m. CST

    How in #e11 can you put Nick Nolte in a movie and not make him "

    by Triumph the Dog

    Who the #ell needs father and son Hulks anyway?

  • April 20, 2002, 5:20 p.m. CST

    I think this all sounds good...

    by BurlIvesLeftNut

    I have faith in Ang Lee... they guy has not let me down once. That could change with this movie, but I doubt it. I just pray for one thing: please for the love of all that is good and holy, have Banner say "Please don't make me angry. You won't like me when I'm angry." Dude, that is iconic, and it will send chills down the audiences spine if you include it in the first teaser.

  • April 20, 2002, 5:46 p.m. CST


    by oblivi

    why is it every time a director and a movie studio get together to make a movie about a comic book character they mess it up really bad???when directors and script writers make movies for example about people with cancer the dont say that cancer was given to them by aliens they give real accounts of how and where the cancer why do these same script writers want to insult movie goers intelligence by screwing with comic characters. before batman all of the other big movie releases failed why because the scripts sucked....tim burton is a fan of the dark batman and that is what he created....joel shcumacher was obviously a fan of the WHAM PLOW batman and he had sucess once and failed the next. my point is you dont ask people to create things that they have no idea of. get a comic book writer to write the scripts and not some guy/girl who is usually writes a sandra bullock movie why mess with hulk i want the full blown green machine that was in the comics and t.v. and that is what the fans deserve. if not this will probably end up like the punisher movie and be a piece of hot shit.

  • April 20, 2002, 7:24 p.m. CST


    by TomVee

    One the talkbackers mentioned the Hulk's origin as having to do with an atomic exmplosion. I don't remember that, but I seem to recall the earliest version of the Hulk being ash-gray rather than green, and looking an awful lot like the Frankenstein monster with his shirt off. I was never much of a Hulk fan, but I also recall his absolute best adventure had to do with a lengthy period where he traveled through a micro-universe full of otherworldly. fantasy elements. Similarly, Thor's best years were spent in Asgard, away from Earth. The business of a Jeckyll-Hyde change in both cases was simply scrapped, and was the better for it. The Hulk was a lot more interesting as the Hulk and Thor was 100 times better just being Thor. Anyway, I would much rather see Iron Man or Silver Surfer brought to the big screen. Both are possible in this CGI age. Doctor Strange has already been done as a decent little TV movie and frankly does not need to be converted into a big-screen production. A FF movie is long overdue, of course, I would give my eyeteeth to see the el-cheapo FF movie that was permanently shelved. I hope everyone noticed how good the Marvel superheroes looked in that recent TV commercial where they are gathered around a conference table. Too bad Hollywood can't seem to ever get it right. X-Men was the most recent case in point. Bad (nonexistent, actually) costumes, dullish performances, critical characters either altered or absent, and not exactly a slam-bang finale.

  • April 20, 2002, 10:41 p.m. CST

    I tend to ramble...

    by Dicio

    I enjoyed the TV show much better than the comic books, in practically every way. Consequently, I'd prefer it if the movie were more like the TV show than the comic. I don't want the Hulk to talk. I don't need it to be a Gamma Bomb explosion. I don't need Rick Jones, or General Ross, but I'll take Betty Ross just to see Jennifer Connelly on screen. Yeah, her breasts seem to have vanished from the face of the earth, which is truly a shame, because beautiful, big, NATURAL breasts are such a rare commodity these days, but at least her eyes are still enchanting. I really want Banner to say, "You wouldn't like me when I'm angry." The best comic book/TV/movie adaptation line ever given, with Bruce Wayne's "I gotta go to work" and Superman's "Would you care to step outside" tied for a very close second. I do think it would be great to see the Green Goliath being chased by and eventually doing battle with the military, but I would prefer that, maybe during the first half of the movie, no one saw him but a lone reporter who no one believed. But hey, that's just me. Probably sounds a little too much like Batman for some folks. When some one pays me to write/direct/produce a Hulk movie, that's the Hulk movie people will complain about in public but end up seeing anyway. Ang is going to make the movie he want's to make, and I say let him. I'm going to go see it. Ang is one of the few directors out there these days who I feel could really be called an artist. I personally didn't like CTHD that much at all, but I can recognize that it was a movie done with integrity, and I believe that he'll imbue the Hulk with that same integrity that so far, only Superman and X-Men came close to having. While I loved the first two Batman movies, I don't think integrity is a word I could use in defining their stronger points. I believe that a good story told well is more important than trying to stay faithful to a medium that rarely stays faithful to itself. And to those who are criticizing Ang's efforts to add integrity, which some of you carelessly render realism or techno-babble, I say shame on you. You criticize him for wanting to understand cell expansion without having the faintest idea of how he'll use that information in the movie. And it's not important that the Ang Lee doesn't seem to understand the character right at the get go. What's important is that he's at least trying to find out. He's asking questions, which several directors have failed to do when helming these types of films, leaving us with a whining Superman and a murderous Batman. Face it, he's gonna change some things, get over it. At least see a script, or a trailer, or heaven forbid, WAIT UNTIL YOU SEE THE FREAKING MOVIE before passing judgement. Naturally some changes are easier to take than others. The ones indicated in these scoops for instance. But those were all refuted. So basically, right now, those who are complaining are complaining about nothing. READ IT AGAIN. YOU'RE GETTING RILED UP OVER NOTHING. Harry managed to redeem himself with his last comment, saying that some change can create somehting more powerful than the source material, which for mine, the TV show did. So BACK OFF, let the man do his job.

  • April 20, 2002, 11:20 p.m. CST

    lack of depth

    by BurlIvesLeftNut

    You know guys, Ang Lee has done some INCREDIBLE work other than Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. Check out Ice Storm if you want to see, what I consider, his best work.

  • April 21, 2002, 12:49 a.m. CST

    Cheapo FF Movie

    by Mutley

    Yo TomVee. You want to see the cheapo FF movie? Just go to Ebay. There are always copies of it there. Be warned, though. Extremely high cheese factor.

  • April 21, 2002, 2:54 a.m. CST

    comics vs movies

    by cheshirekat5865

    Here's my 2 cents worth. I'm a fanboy with over 30 years of convoluted comics history in my brain and it got so damn twisted that when something like the ultimate line came up I could only be relieved. My point is this, limiting yourself to a fixed universe can only hurt the story. That's why comics titles like New X-men are so great. they're starting fresh, without staying bogged down in thirty year-old storylines that take away from beleivablity. Do I think hollywood has ass-raped some potentially really good comics stories? Of course. I'm just as pissed as every other fanboy who was subjected to Batman and Robin or Captain America. But after X-men (which I really enjoyed), and what looks to be an excellent spider-man treatment, I'm willing to give Avi Arad, and Ang Lee the benefit of the doubt. This isn't Roger Corman or Joel Shumacher we're talking about. He's an oscar nominated director. Just relax and enjoy the ride. Or at least wait until we know for a fact that it sucks....

  • April 21, 2002, 4:44 a.m. CST

    Hollywood's not making this movie.....

    by Mestizoy

    A lot of you are complaining about how Hollywood likes messing up video game and comic book movies but the thing is.....Ang Lee is anything BUT Hollywood. You're talking about the guy who directed Sense and Sensability and Ice Storm which are 2 movies that don't get nearly as much publicity as say....Swordfish. I trust in Ang Lee's approach because it's different. You guys act like you want to be told the same story over and over again because you're too narrowminded to try anything new. I'm a huge comic book fan, but I don't let my loyalty for comics hinder my love for movies. In this day and age you HAVE to be open-minded or you'll be unhappy with what life has to offer you. Enjoy originality...don't drown in bitterness.

  • April 21, 2002, 5:33 a.m. CST

    Hey, Sherlock_Holmes! I know the original Sherlock was a coke ad

    by Chishu_Ryu

    James Bond sucks? Tim Burton's Batman a hokey action flick? I agree that Bond was similar to Bats, but only because the former was a pre-historic outdated relic of the Cold War who needs to be put down and the world was in need of a new badass with cool gadgets and the Batman franchise was there to pick it up! And of course the Animated Series is going to be a little better because you can do anything in a cartoon. In live action films, you're limited to this thing called "live action." Tim Burton's original Batman was not just the Greatest Super-Hero movie of all time, it wasn't just one of the greatest summer blockbusters of all time, it was art! Not high art, mind you, but art all the same! And why is this so? Well, let me break it down. First, let's look at the components. Anton Furst's incredible set designs, an organic continuum of the Batsuit design. Danny Elfman's pounding quirky score. Michael Keaton's sublime performance. Jack Nicholson chewing up the scenery, which is what a Joker is supposed to do. That strange soundtrack by Prince. The beautiful Kim Basinger. All rolled into one two hour opus under the mastery of Tim Burton's dark yet humorous vision! A friend of mine once foolishly commented, "But Batman had no plot! Where was the storyline?" Silly rabbit! Batman wasn't about who did this or what happens next. True art doesn't need a strong storyline! Look at a film by Tarkovsky of Bresson and see how threadbare their storylines are. Nay, a strong plot would only have taken away from this, as the Joker so eloquently put it, "new aesthetic." Batman was an art piece about...the Batman mythos! It was about that opening shot of Anton Furst's Gotham City. It was about Batman cooly taking the thug by the shirt and saying, "I'm Batman!" It was about the Citizen Kane-esque loneliness of Wayne Manor. It was about Bruce Wayne's strange yet epic intro to Vicki Vale and Knox. It was about Batman crashing through the museum sunroof to save the day. It was about "all those wonderful toys." It was about the intro of the Batmobile, and that wondrous gothic sequence of the Batmobile speeding down the dark highway to the Batcave, a metaphoric descent into hell. It was about the fragility of Bruce Wayne's psyche. It was about the Batwing's silhouette in front of a full moon proclaiming to all that Batman has finally arrived! It was about the final showdown between Bats and his all-time arch-enemy, the Joker. It was about seeing that glorious Bat-Signal at the end, proclaiming to all that Batman was here to stay! Then we come to Michael Keaton. It may be an overstatement to say that Keaton's performance/portrayal was perhaps the most underrated in all movie history, but overstate I shall! Burton's approach was to combine Batman's history of gothic, darkness, humor, mystery, and grittiness into one messed up character. Underneath it all, an exploration, albeit a simple one, of the duality of human nature, metaphorized by the duality of Batman and the Joker. Michael Keaton nailed this duality. His ability to play both drama and comedy. His eyes, his eyes that seem if they're about to explode off the screen, but masked by the boyish mannerisms and studderings of someone who never quite got over seeing his parents killed before his eyes. And Keaton's eyebrows, his face. A gargoyle! It's almost safe to assume that Furst's Gotham City was an organic extension of the Batsuit which was an organic extension of Michael Keaton's sublime qualities! The only thing the first Batman could have used a little more of was emotion, but Burton made up for that in spades with Batman Returns. Now, Batman Forever was watchable if only to see steamy Nicole Kidman heat up the screen. Val Kilmer was passable, Jim Carrey did a fine job, but what Schumacher did with Two-Face, the most tragic and complex of Batman's Rogues Gallery, was unforgivable. Batman & Robin doesn't even count as a movie, but more like a bad dream. Hopefully that's what it'll turn out to be. Of course in my opinion, the Batman franchise was a thing of the 90's. It's gone now, and we should move on. But Tim Burton's Batman (and its "sequel") will be forever! A perfect marriage of art and crass commercialism! My only regret is that Tim Burton wasn't signed on to make the Hulk instead, even though he probably would've ended up using a stop-motion photography Hulk. So that's my two and a half cents. Put that in your crack pipe and smoke it, Sherlock!

  • April 21, 2002, 7:20 a.m. CST

    Father Hulk

    by Grand Digital

    The Hulk Daddy idea could be good. Ang Lee wants to explore the psychological aspects of the character...focussing on the idea of someone who can't control their violent nature. Well people like that in da real world usually have violent dads, and as they grow up they take on their dad's the Nolte-Hulk could be like a symbol of that. Good form. possibly.

  • April 21, 2002, 8:25 a.m. CST

    Support Group for abused Hulks...please give generously

    by Molotov

    Do we really need to understand anything more about the Hulk other than he's big, green and angry? I don't think we do.

  • April 21, 2002, 9:58 a.m. CST

    Thanks for proving my point, Molotov

    by Dicio

    It's thinking like that that gives us movies like Batman and Robin. Do we need to know anything about Batman other than that he drives a cool car, has a bunch of gadgets, and runs around in tights? I think so. True, I was content in thinking that it was the supressed rage that is within us all that the Gamma radiation brought out, but adding the psychological scars of an abusive childhood? Could be interesting. You can always rent Godzilla if you want to see a big, green, angry brute smashing things. I'd rather see a character on screen that I can sympathize, if not empathize, with.

  • April 21, 2002, 3:17 p.m. CST

    The way to do a Hulk movie is similar to the "Banner" miniseries

    by Triumph the Dog

    Not literally the same plot, but similar atmosphere. A Bruce Banner haunted by people who have accidentally died during the Hulk's rampages and a government that goes to great lengths to cover up the Hulk's activities, hoping to use Banner as a military weapon.

  • April 21, 2002, 4:03 p.m. CST

    Harry, thou art the biggest ass.

    by Fatal Discharge

    "like Kubrick with THE SHINING... making something possibly more affecting upon the silver screen than even was in the source material that inspired it" - I would STRONGLY DISAGREE with this grammatically incorrect sentence. The Shining is one of, if not, the best books Stephen King's written. I like Kubrick's film but it doesn't compare to the novel - it's all about atmosphere. The book's scariest scene (the corpse in the tub) was pathetic in the film and all the emotion in the book (we care what happens to all the characters including Jack) is missing in the film. As for Ang Lee, I'm sure with his talent he will make one of the best comic book adaptations ever (and that's not saying much considering all the crap ones made).

  • April 21, 2002, 8:11 p.m. CST

    ang lee's HULK

    by idravlis

    (purist to the point of facism).. If true, it is very disapointing that the HULK will not be EXACT. When i heard that the GREEN was going to become screenborn (again) i dreamt. i dreamt of a glorious movie, pure to the bone, faithfull to the original source like LOTR is, a worthy prequel of.... THE GREY HULK!!!!!!!!!!!!!. May i live long to see this some day.

  • April 22, 2002, 1:59 a.m. CST


    by Dhali Clone

    Hey, people... you can't say that Ang Lee will screw this up. You can't say it will suck. You can't say it's not a good idea. You haven't even seen it yet. You haven't even seen a trailer yet. You haven't seen pictures of The Hulk (that actually show what the movie's about). Don't just say, "It's gonna suck." I know you're just stating your opinion, but don't just dimiss it because you don't like Ang Lee, or comics, or comic-based movies, or movies, or The Hulk, or green giants, or ants, or french fries. It's just information! Information early on in the films life! It could change at any time. Personally, I have no opinion on it. I didn't read the comic (and probably never will), I've never seen any other Hulk-related show/movie. So, this'll be new for me. I'm open-minded about it.

  • April 22, 2002, 10:43 a.m. CST


    by MonkeySpazmaster

    It's probably best to reserve judgment until more details are known. I personally thought Crouching Tiger was incredibly over rated, so I'm not sure of Ang's talents as a director. But I'm willing to wait for more info. I thought that the XMen film would be a big pile of shit but was proved wrong. If Hitler was so evil then why am I hungry?