Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Official HULK Logo plus Copernicus reports in on the set last night with photos!

Well this report is a HELL of a lot better than the one from yes by RickSlamu2	Apr 23rd, 2002 09:20:57 AM

the absorbing man by PUNY HUMANS	Apr 23rd, 2002 09:26:07 AM
It's Universal's money and they can spend it anyway they please. I just hope the absorbing man has his wrecking ball. Peace.
Hulk smashes cars? by rev_skarekroe	Apr 23rd, 2002 09:48:55 AM
What the hell is this? He would never do that in the comics! Oh wait, yeah he would. On a completely unrelated note, what's up with the new Star Wars action figures? Spread-eagle legs and 3 points of articulation? And I got major spoilers just from taking my Hanger-duel Anakin out of the package! And I'm having an extremely busy day at work, but I'd much rather be wasting time on talkbacks. Bah! sk
do not like logo by rowox	Apr 23rd, 2002 10:05:42 AM
nope, don't like it. but of course a logo does not a good movie make. hear my rhetoric, u know i'm right. let me see, what other cliche terms that posters use here can i use? funny, can't think of any...i'll probably remember them later - always the way. oh, and 'badass' dude - yes, fuck the 'first' posters. fuck them up their stupid asses indeed. in fact, get bruce banner to fuck them...THEN tell him he has a little dick. that'll make him angry. they wouldn't want to see him when he's angry. of course they won't be able to SEE him, but they will be able to FEEL their ring tearing...
This "absorbing" talk is much more disturbing to me than the org by Lance Rock	Apr 23rd, 2002 10:16:39 AM
I have to agree with an earlier post--why make the film adaptation if you're only going to change the origin? Why fix what ain't broke? A baby Hulk?!?!? Arrrrrrrrggghhhh!!!!!!
real absorbing men should be named crusher creel and be endowed by BurlIvesLeftNut	Apr 23rd, 2002 10:18:51 AM
this movie will rock, maybe not in the way I want it to, but it will rock, nonetheless.
That logo doesn't look too official... by Insane Tiki	Apr 23rd, 2002 10:52:53 AM
...but, seriously, this movie is shaping up to be such a huge disappointment that I don't care anymore.
Who gives a shit about the story? It's going to look fantast by Longfellow	Apr 23rd, 2002 10:56:40 AM
Ang Lee has yet to completely tit something up, and with Rick Heinrichs on production design (you know, Tim Burton's most regular design collaborator?), the thing's going to look great. So what if it's not the original Hulk origin story? It's hardly like he's got a Batman or Superman-style necessity to have his origins told in a certain way. His origins mean shit all to the character - all that matters is to try and stop mutating into a big green (or grey or whatever) monster thingie. THAT's his motivation, not the fact that his home planet was destroyed and he was brought up a good american, or that he witnessed his parents being killed as a child. His character is forward-looking, not backward-looking like Supes and Bats. Chill out kiddies... Right - that's enough comics fanboy shit for one day. Longfellow out.
The trouble with Marvel heroes by Wino-Forever	Apr 23rd, 2002 11:11:16 AM
is that there's a shortage of good villains. Aside from maybe Professor X and Magneto, there are no hero/villain relationships as iconic as Superman/Lex Luthor, or Batman/The Joker. Kingpin's pretty cool, but Daredevil and the Punisher have to share him, and Dr. Doom's alright, but he's everyone's villain. Who's the Hulk got? The Rhino? As comic geeks go, I'm a lightweight, though, so maybe someone can straighten me out on this issue.
What is the Magic Sphere thing? by Lobanhaki	Apr 23rd, 2002 11:26:51 AM
Light sources in CG are ideal light sources. That is, ideal in that they only exist like that in a computer. the reality is, there is no such thing as a point light, or an area light, or a spot light as it would exist in a animation program. Real light sources aren't often like that. ------------------------------ -------------------------To render something in a realistic way, it helps to find some way of making imperfect, non ideal lighting references. For that, there are two really good methods: One, you make a light map, a very high detail, high contrast image of the surroundings. With this, you can use it as a light source itself. Two, you do the same thing, and use that to create a number of computer lights in the program That is what the magic ball is about. It probably has a reflective and a dull surface, each on opposing sides of the ball. The other thing, I imagine, is a reference for framing a very large creature. No good doing plate photography for an effects shot if it's impossible for the creature to fit in the shot.
whino (or wino (already forgot your name because I am senile) by BurlIvesLeftNut	Apr 23rd, 2002 11:34:37 AM
A few Hulk villains: Doc Samson, Abomination, the Leader. But you do bring up an interesting point... Marvel heroes have more going on INTERNALLY than DC heroes. And I agree that it can be difficult bringing that to a medium like movies. I think that is why Marvel has failed so miserably in the past to bring its characters more into the mainstream. They just don't necessarily jive with what the public would expect. With that in mind however, Marvel has really changed things by insisting that the stories and characters are what matters. I think the X-Men movie was a good indication of that because it took the characters seriously. Hulk is heading in the same direction, I believe. Ang Lee is a great person to bring the psychology of the Hulk to the screen, which has always been more interesting than who he is fighting that day.
Lou IS in it! by helvis	Apr 23rd, 2002 11:37:11 AM
Yay!!!!
What's up with you freaks? THIS LOOKS FUCKING GREAT! by HubbaBubbaKid	Apr 23rd, 2002 02:14:23 PM
Remember way back when - when the first glimpse of a logo was EXCITING? Remember way back when - when there weren't subjective script reports that we put huge amounts of faith in? Remember way back when - when the thought of a movie about one of the greatest comic book characters EVER is being made by one of the world's greatest directors, starring an Academy Award winner, and featuring a reputable & talented actor used to make us giddy with glee? Now remember that, as movie fans, maybe we should stop taking a dump on every single movie that comes out... and that maybe our role is to be ourselves and not too-cool-to-care versions of ourselves. And remember that, what you shit on today, you will love tomorrow, and then will probably shit on again the day later just so you don't seem so lame as to actually LIKE something. CHEER UP, PEOPLE... IT'S THE HULK... AND THE LOGO IS COOL... AND THE CARS SHOULD BE SMASHED... AND ANG LEE KNOWS WHAT HE'S DOING... AND ANNA KOURNIKOVA PICS CAN BE FOUND AT www.celebdirectory.com... SO STOP FUCKIN' AROUND AND SMILE!
Was That A Phd Specializing In Dumbass? by Son Of Batboy	Apr 23rd, 2002 08:10:32 PM
Some people never learn.
"You know how much I hate the pigs so that was a doubly great sc by deep 13	Apr 23rd, 2002 08:32:49 PM
dick
As long as shit gets smashed through the whole film by brush420	Apr 23rd, 2002 09:44:07 PM
I just want the Hulk in the whole movie crushing stuff all the way!
SW Episode One/ The Hulk by jimdin2001	Apr 23rd, 2002 11:55:16 PM
Sooooooo, Everyone gets really giddy about Episode One, hears its fab and then when it comes out, not so good. Now, everyone seems a bit down about this movie. Maybe it will be good. It seems people go to all these web sites and pick up negative vibes. Not getting ratty because I likes the site, but while i know that its difficult to avoid pre movie stuff- i read some e2 script but dont know if it were genuine, just too tempted by that one- maybe its not so good to read about stuff you are unsure about. I also understand if you know if it is good or not b4 hand maybe you ca save your
Logo rocks, Smashed cop car rocks, Casting rocks, Locations rock by Kikstad	Apr 24th, 2002 12:28:57 AM
You Naysayers of Doom can all kiss my gamma-loving ass!
Hulk Spoilers were not fake - PROOF by perplectica	Apr 24th, 2002 12:33:23 AM
I'm the fellow who found the shooting schedule for Hulk -- I have put it in the mail to Harry and the Aint It Cool Crew. This will confirm all the info from my recent postings.
Pretty good logo, but so what? by Rain_Dog	Apr 24th, 2002 12:52:22 AM
When every second fucking character in this movie is gamma-irradiated, when Bruce Banner's Hulk-ness is his daddy's fault not the result of his own hubris (Hulking out as a baby for Christ's sake? Com off it), when Banner's dad is the fucking Absorbing Man, played by Nick Nolte no less, when there are Hulk DOGS and RATS, that's when I say fuck you, Ang Lee. He's doing "academic project on how cells can actually grow?" Did Richard Donner do research on how Kryptonian biology would be affected by Earth's yellow sun and conclude that since there was no such place as Krytpon and the whole "yellow sun" thing was ridiculous he'd just scrap the whole idea of Superman? Did Raimi do a research project and go, "Hang on, there's no fucking way a spider bite would give someone spider powers. I'll make this Normal-Man, where Parker gets partial paralysis from the spider's venom and drools on himself in a hopsital ward for the duration of the movie"? Hell no. They realised that there are a lot of impossibilities in comic books, because they're fucking fantasy, but that they are ultimately excellent stories, and often allegorical. Now, don't get me wrong, this will in all probability be quite a good movie. But it won't be the Hulk, and that's enough for me to say fuck it. That's right, I'm prejudging this movie. In fact, I'm boycotting the motherfucker (or downloading it so as not to put any money in the pocket of the studio that funded it). I'm sick of arrogant directors who assume their cockamamie 'vision' of a given work is superior to that of the original author. If Ang thought the Hulk's origin was stupid, didn't like the idea of Banner experimenting on himself or getting dosed with nuclear radiation, in fact didn't really want to make an Incredible Hulk film at all, then why did he sign on? In fact, this started to go down hill when they removed the 'Inredible' prefix. FUCK FUCK FUCK. I'm deeply, deeply upset. Once again, to anyone telling me I'm taking the whole thing too seriously and that I should wait and see, a pre-emptive fuck you too.
"Marvel heroes have more going on INTERNALLY than DC heroes" by GilesT	Apr 24th, 2002 09:06:27 AM
Sorry, but I laughed for a full minute when I read that. Marvel comics are, for all intents and purposes, 20-page fight scenes. Just because all the exposition therefore has to be done with "thought bubbles", doesn't make the characters deep. Read some Hellblazer, Preacher or Sandman, then try and say that again with a straight face.
The Hulk logo - this contradiction is interesting by Robin Redfield	Apr 24th, 2002 01:44:20 PM
I have been studying this official Hulk logo for about five minutes now. A thought does come to me. If this film is a take on The Hulk focused on the characters and relationships and such, I am somewhat curious as to why the first piece of offical visual promotion is a flashy logo with a glimpse of a large green monsters glare. With the cast on board and available for such things, how about at least a terrified Betty Ross reflected in the Hulks whopping great eye? With perhaps a barking Thunderbolt Ross in the other eye? For a film gestating on the people, the first proper publicity move seems to be lacking every actual character in the film except for the big green monster The Hulk, whose origins seem more 'replaced' than 'tweaked' and I notice a post that heralds proof on its way to Harry Knowles that the those rumours are true. Is the film going to follow its talked up plus points at least if not the comics?
That logo is OBVIOUSLY a photoshop fake ! by RobinP	Apr 24th, 2002 02:18:22 PM
Well, somebody had to say it ! Jeez, sarcasm CAN be fun.
People calm down. by alpha	Apr 25th, 2002 03:13:16 AM
I am getting so sick of people whining about hulk dogs or hulk rats, 1/2 of Hulks major foes share the same source as him so why are these ideas so sacrilegious. The Leader, Abomination, Doc Samson etc etc. I'd have liked to see the gamma bomb as much as anyone but the concept just doesn't work well anymore. In the 60's the idea of a Gamma Bomb test going wrong was easily believable but nowadays the idea of genetic manipulation run amok carries a lot more resonance. Over the years the concept that Banners father abused him was introduced into the mythos and has now become part of canon so I ask you how out of left field is it to make his father the cause of his mutation as well as his abuser really? It sounds to me as if they are trying to combine the two aspects that make up the Hulks origin in a logical manner. As I said in another talkback it may be absolute crap but until we see the end result how can we be sure? Lets all calm down and wait and see what the end result is ... if its shit then flame away but until then calm down and stop judging the end result from concepts you have yet to see worked through. Its got a top notch cast, a stylish director and it will probably have top effects people working on it and yet some people have labeled it a travesty before its even been filmed let alone edited. James Bond is nothing like the books but it doesn't mean that the Bond films are crap (some are but some are wonderful fun), Batman has significant changes as does the X-Men and even some elements of Superman yet most people agree they are good superhero films. Spiderman has organic webshooters and people go insane yet when you think about it if Peter was smart enough to create such a super useful temporary webbing fluid at that age what was he doing in high school rather than making millions? The organic webshooter idea solves one of the flaws in Spiderman's origin which would of made it harder to suspend disbelief. I read the comics and even when I was 10 I knew him building the webshooters and inventing the fluid was a stretch. I'd of happily watched the film with the normal webshooters but would the average person ... or would they have sat their and groaned at the ludicrousness of that particular idea? 9 times out of 10 these changes are made when afdapting something because the original source material was difficult to adapt. Give them the benefit of the doubt until you see the result. I remember people whining about Xenarwen and when I saw FOTR I saw her replace Glorfindel in one scene which actually probably enhanced the story by givig Aragorn's true love some backbone which wasn't evident in the book (I knew she had it but in the book she's hardly even a character at all). By adding that scene and a few pieces of dialogue between her and Aragorn they fleshed out one of the book few real weaknesses. Oh and for those of you who dont consider it a weakness please remember that Arwen was actually a late addition to the book after olkien realised that Eowyn's character arc was leading her away from being Aragorn's bride rather than towards it as he had originally intended. JRRT himself probably would of liked to go back and flesh that character out more but was oncerned at rewriting already completed sequences to such a large extent which is why he did so in the appendix of ROTK. In closing ... lets all wait and see the result before we make a judgement.
marvel vs dc by Caligula the God	Apr 25th, 2002 02:35:53 PM
Whatever the comics are like now, I don't know. Its all the same people writing all the same comics. Not like the old days. I stopped reading them after the 90s boom and gimmick covers. Traditionally, DC heroes were rich, big and strong and had physical weaknesses:Kryptonite, the color yellow, binding magic bands together. Marvel heroes had problems with prejudice, getting money to pay aunt May's doctor bills, alcoholism, etc. That's what he meant. Also, one reason DCs translated better was because they are owned by Warner and always had big money behind them. Marvel had to get by with Golan Globus, Concorde and the like
For the Ultimate Hulk script, by sniktbub	May 3rd, 2002 05:39:08 AM
Brian Micheal Bendis said it best... you can't revamp a character by thinking you can do a better job that the originator. A character is classic because the elements of that character are timeless. You see, Stan Lee wanted to portray his anger and frustration in a cool and unique way that anyone would love to relate it to. The entire movie, based on the above statement, should reflect, not necessarily on what actually makes Banner the Hulk, but more why Banner becomes the Hulk. The Hulk was supposed to be Banner's anger and fear brought to life. When people get upset, they regress... in the heat of anger, it's difficult to maintain your composure, and the Hulk is nothing more than a tantrum personified. That's why he would Hulk out when he became angry. The t.v. show was wonderful in that respect because Banner was fighting to keep the beast caged. When I was a kid, I used to imagine myself "Hulking Out" when I was picked on or made fun of... the Hulk was, even at a time when I couldn't understand it, the most relatable character I had known, simply because of my anger towards the bullies and the fear I lived in because of them. I think that the screenwriters are way too interested in doing "their own thing" as opposed to remaining true to what thousands upon thousands of fans already know is great. People want to see a Hulk movie because they want to see what a comic can't show them... they wan't to see it in motion. They don't want a "new" Hulk. They want to see the one they love come even closer to life. In order for this story to really shine, in my opinion, it needs only the elements that made it great with a fresh 2k script. Now I'm not saying that the movie would be perfect just because the Hulk would reflect on inner-workings of Banner's anger. I definitely think that the cause of Banner becoming the Hulk is important, too. If they just decided to make the Hulk a mutant... well, that would just suck. The gamma bomb idea is a bit outdated, but the general concept of the radiation has always been consistent in the history of the Hulk, and that's something that should remain true. What's probably most important is that it be an "accident." Banner's goal in comics, and also in the t.v. show, is to rid himself of the Hulk... it's a curse. Spider-Man, the X-Men... they all have control of who they are and what they become. The reason the Hulk is so unique is because he "doesn't" have control. He's an uncontrollable force of nature. I think that the screenwriters involved in making the Hulk a success on the big-screen want to do something that has never been done before, but what they may not understand is that they can do that and still be true to those that know and feel the Hulk. If this movie is to bring new fans to the legend of the Hulk, the movie shouldn't send them in the opposite direction. It doesn't matter what form of radiation, so long as radiation is the cause. The movie should remain true in it's theme so that old Hulk fans won't be let down, and new Hulk fans can "truly" love the Hulk. And one more thing: To whomever removed the "Incredible" from the title: Have you ever stood in the towering shadow of a seven plus foot, emerald green-skinned behemoth... mouth foaming with unconscious rage, hands larger than two of your head, colossal feet that can carry him three miles in one leap and ripped muscle distortion the likes of which Flex magazine never dreamed... unsure if the bus he's about to heave is meant for you?... of course you haven't... but wouldn't it be... "Incredible?"

Talkbacks

Official HULK Logo plus Copernicus reports in on the set last night with photos!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks