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

A few more FANTASTIC FOUR reviews from NYC pop in!!

first by TheJoker	Jun 30th, 2005 01:37:28 AM

foist by white owl	Jun 30th, 2005 01:38:31 AM
gotta get my mark bishes, will most definately check this out with a large popcorn in lap.
First? by El_Barstardo	Jun 30th, 2005 01:38:32 AM
Can it be?
Hmm, guess not... by El_Barstardo	Jun 30th, 2005 01:39:01 AM
Ahh well. Try again.
Wrong. It should be Shakespeare by docfalken	Jun 30th, 2005 01:43:57 AM
If Lucas is able to ride the mythology tip for the Star Wars flicks, then Marvel and its vast storylines and powerful allegories, HAS to show respect to the comic book history when they translate the characters to the silver screen. Instead of putting together a product that targets the teenybopper crowd, why not let the grandness of the characters be fully realized? Spiderman has done that. Batman just did it again.
how about.. by nolan bautista	Jun 30th, 2005 01:49:43 AM
the Fantastic Foursome..i'd like to see The Things rock hard (literally) cock throbbing inside Alba's dripping slit..its cummerin' time!!
the guy about me is right by MaximusCD	Jun 30th, 2005 01:59:40 AM
I'd love to see The Thing's gravely cock cunt-raping the Invisible Bitch Alba. Damn, she is hot. Indeed, my friend, it is cummerin' time.
Velvet Revolver by Gideon82	Jun 30th, 2005 02:06:20 AM
The only good thing to come out of this damn movie is Velvet Revolver releasing a new song for it. Then, go back to how Velvet Revolver was the only positive thing to come from the Hulk movie and it is twice now that VR was the only upside to a marvel flick. Maybe Marvel should create a comic based on Slash.
Silver Surfer by Det. John Kimble	Jun 30th, 2005 02:14:40 AM
Galactus, Norrin Radd and the FF. That's a movie I'd like to see. Unless Uwe squeezes it out.
This is like the third "F4" review to slam "Hulk." by SmarkJobber	Jun 30th, 2005 02:20:41 AM
Which immediately tell me that a) these reviewers have all the taste of a whore's mouth, and b) "Fantastic Four" will be a Level Three Barb Wire Enema to sit through, in comparison to, say, "WotW." I'll still watch it on Starz demand, just to see if Queen Latifah cameos as an onlooker who says, "That little torch boy be hoooot!"
kudos docfalken by sith-vol	Jun 30th, 2005 02:36:52 AM
I agree completely. A sI stated in the earlier F4 talkback, the thing that kills me is how they throw out the source material when doing these comic book films so that they can appeal to the mass audience when they already have one reading the damned books in the first place. At least we still have Spidey and Batman.
"Lost in Space" by Ribbons	Jun 30th, 2005 02:50:52 AM
Ummm...what? Quint, you seem like a nice guy and all, but damned if I can't see how that makes a lick of sense. Besides for this being sci-fi and there being a family in it. And it's disappointing, but not really very surprising, that we finally get the "these guys might have biases/not know what they're talking about treatment" for a pair of positive FF reviews and not somewhere during the string of positively inept negative reviews that came before them.
"So my recommendation is if you're one of the mass movie goe by Thorfin	Jun 30th, 2005 02:53:37 AM
What kind of a recommendation is that? I go to movies, so I must be part of the mass movie goers, and therefore I should see this movie? I should go see a movie where all the best scenes are shown in the trailer so I can get the "context"? This doesn't look like a movie where context is all that important.
Figure of Speech by Ribbons	Jun 30th, 2005 02:56:23 AM
Cheese and crackers
Eh... by Ribbons	Jun 30th, 2005 03:00:43 AM
...actually, those reviews kinda sucked.
no by llephen	Jun 30th, 2005 03:05:37 AM
this movie is obviously crap, and i find it appalling that the studios choose to back garbage like this with all the ads i can't escape from. and they wonder why they're in the "slump" they're in. it's because they keep shoving this turdy crap at the public. wait, what am i saying.. those retards will go spend the $8.25+ to see this garbage, because they got a taco bell meal with a picture on the bag that says they should go see it. whatever. True story: about a month ago, i was on a message board on myspace, and this girl posted a topic about what summer movies were going to be the best. she said her pick was Batman Begins, because she "saw the preview and it looked good, it had lots of explosions in it"
Notice hw everthing FF must first be qualified? by JUSTICE41	Jun 30th, 2005 03:08:18 AM
Why even bother with the reviews if all that will be said is going to be negative. Negativity based on nothing of course. I think all the reviewers are doing verbal blowjobs to the fatman and fatc rew of this site so they can get their words posted. Unfortunately while blowing the fat guys they slipped the tongue down into the hairy holes. But it's always best to know that a person has a bias up front. This way you can distrust everything they say. Works for The media as well.
I know I'm going to see it. I'm pretty sure it'll be by Lone Fox	Jun 30th, 2005 03:16:50 AM
The FF comics were always wordy. And Tim Story made Taxi with 'Queen' 'Latifah'. Fuck.
Is there really a big movie slump? by docfalken	Jun 30th, 2005 03:19:36 AM
I'm convinced that studio lobbyists on the payroll go out of their way to whisper in CNN's ear with all of this chicken-littling. I mean even if a film does bubcus in the theaters, there is tremendous money to be made on DVDs. Which is why we are seeing big budget movies just lining up on the runway to be released. Theaters have found ways to make a ton of additional revenue by showing us 20 minutes of commercials while we sit and wait for the film to begin. Not to mention the $7 Cokes. So is this "slump" merely the evolution to where the market is going? I mean I don't see horse and buggy weekly reports, but I'm sure that sales have been down since Ford started cranking out those metal beasts.
Justice... by Sayhey Kid	Jun 30th, 2005 03:22:35 AM
Everyone just wants bash this, so they can say "I told you so"...it's as close to a big shot as many of them will get. Give 'em a break. It is based on nothing. If it's bad, they rejoice for being right, if it's good, they find little reasons to hate it (much like most of the Batman Begins naysayers)
Well so far the only reaction presented from all these reviews by Thirteen 13	Jun 30th, 2005 03:22:39 AM
Is by saying one of the following: (1) that its at least better than The Hulk (although I think its safe to assume The Hulk was a much better movie than Fantastic Four) (2) Jessica Albas tits (3) Its nothing but a good old mindless popcorn chomping action movie so enjoy (4) its cool because it doesn't take itself seriously like X-Men (So I guess that means that Batman Begins and X-Men suck because they were serious superhero movies (5) Jessica Albas tits (6) Jessica Alba taking off her cloths (7) Jessica Alba running (8) the cheesy parts are forgivable (9) The Human Torch is the coolest character because his flame effects are so cool (10) Jessica Albas tits (11) The flying spinning cars and cool explosions......I was actually ging to break down and see this in the matinee (no full price for this one) and give it a day in court on the off chance this may be a good one. But the more I read these coverup apologetic reviews the more I'm just going to have to pass and wait til its on cable or rent it from netflix.
oh and The Hulk by Sayhey Kid	Jun 30th, 2005 03:24:33 AM
isn't in the same league as Elektra and Blade 3...it was MUCH WORSE...YAWN.
The bitter bitchslap to the back of AICN's head is going to by Triumph poops!	Jun 30th, 2005 03:25:20 AM
Man, what is it with you guys around here constantly tearing at this thing? Fuck, talk about holding a grudge or something simply because you didn't get a set visit or Fox didn't buy ad space here or something. Honestly, speaking as a lifelong FF fan, I'm genuinely looking forward to this now. The actors look fine, they look the part, the trailers have made me laugh and made me think "Yeah, that looks about right for a live action FF movie." Overall I bet the general public -- yes, John Q. Public versus sour faced geeks who can't ever tolerate one micron of deviation from any type of source material -- is going to eat this up. Moreso than BATMAN. Wait and see.
Folks Are Camping Out At Gruman's Theater Right Now In Antic by docfalken	Jun 30th, 2005 03:50:54 AM
Well they should be if this film treated the audience like we not only had brains, but were familiar with the characters. Instead the targetted audience needs to get dropped off and picked up after the movie is done. "Wow, you're hot!" Gong.
Thirteen 13, reality check: Jessica Alba's tits will ALWAYS by Triumph poops!	Jun 30th, 2005 03:54:31 AM
Face the facts, man. Watching Jessica Alba running around in a skin tight costume (or shedding out of one) and jiggling her tight body will always be far more blood pumping and far more worthy of exposing some film as opposed to the rolls and rolls of celluloid that were wasted on the snorefest that was HULK, which was the cure for insomnia.
Have you read the Arad interview @ MTV? by eule	Jun 30th, 2005 04:58:49 AM
That guy has so many projects in the works, it's hard to imagine that he takes his time with each movie.And now with Marvel producing movies on their own, it makes me wonder how they're going to pull it off with hardly any experience in that field. It seems that Marvel is going more for Quantity rather than Quality.
Was supposed to go to the screening last night in NYC. by Mr. Profit	Jun 30th, 2005 05:17:47 AM
But the rain was ridiculous.
Who gives a Shit if FF makes more cash than BB by John-Locke	Jun 30th, 2005 05:20:10 AM
We are here to talk about Films and their Merits/Weaknesses, whether they by Stylistically or thematic etc. I'm pretty sure FF will make ton's of money but so did Big Mommas House so what is your point? Hopefully with FF starting with a Director for hire rather than an Auteur Fox can guarantee a sequel/sequels and we can have someone like Ang Lee come in after the initial Origin Set up has been done. Origins are fun but they have usually been done to death already by anyone who read the comics or watched the cartoon. IMHO that is why the Hulk is seen by a lot of Schmucks as a failure. Ang created a new twist on the Hulk origin and made it something deep and meaningfull, the comic book equivalent of Paul Schraders "Affliction", anyone who's inherited their Dad's bad temper can relate deeply with this piece of art (yes Art). Can we have two seperate Comic Book talkbacks from now on, one for people who get The Hulk regardless of a few flaws here and there, and another for the people who hated it and just wanted more HULK SMASH.
The more grown up approach of Batman Begins suits DC material bu by Silver_Joo	Jun 30th, 2005 05:21:14 AM
The fact is that this Fantastic Four film looks okay because all of the characters say the lines they are supposed to say. That is as deep as Marvel characterisation gets to be honest. If Wolverine called somebody "bub" in X-Men 3 there would be smiles all round in a theatre. DC will soon kick Marvel into touch cinematically speaking because they have Batman and Superman and they are iconic characters that do not need to be FX'd up to look great, they merely are. Spiderman is all Marvel have now as they rape their properties for a quick buck. They have ruined their comics too by letting Brian "Why won't David Mamet return my calls?" Bendis write soporific chats in caves/offices/SHIELD helicarriers and so on. What you are seeing is pretty much the sum of Marvel's parts. They can't offer much more than a good ride at the cinema. DC will offer some depth with Batman sequels and Superman.
OK I liked The Hulk, but damn I am hearing too much about him on by Mr. Profit	Jun 30th, 2005 05:22:43 AM

Hulk was fantastic. Ang Lee approached it with intelligence and by Silver_Joo	Jun 30th, 2005 05:25:54 AM
It is sad that a lot of film goers reacted badly towards Hulk; it is certainly an anomaly within the Marvel filmography as it was beautifully shot and articulate. It asked the audience to care and most didn't. That does not make it a bad film; it just does not fit into what Marvel are about right now: profit, marketing, turd polishing.
"A Uwe"... by SalvatoreGravano	Jun 30th, 2005 06:40:04 AM
At least learn to pronounce his name.
bollox by soulsonic	Jun 30th, 2005 06:46:50 AM
I hate it when folk say things like "it's just a fun summer movie" or "It isn't shakespeare", as if this justifies it for being complete shite. Face it, it's rubbish. There's no point in convincing yourself otherwise.
bollox by soulsonic	Jun 30th, 2005 06:46:55 AM
I hate it when folk say things like "it's just a fun summer movie" or "It isn't shakespeare", as if this justifies it for being complete shite. Face it, it's rubbish. There's no point in convincing yourself otherwise.
What's the point of advance reviews? by misterglass	Jun 30th, 2005 06:50:43 AM
If Quint is going to color them any way he chooses when he writes an introduction for them? It may be another thing if he himself has seen the movie, but I never see any other editor (either online or print) adding their own biased opinion to try to color reviews one way or another. What I got out of these reviews is that it's really not nearly as bad as everyone seems to think/want it to be, even if it's not perfect. And it won't do better than Batman.
bollox by soulsonic	Jun 30th, 2005 06:52:19 AM
someimes i fell like i'm repeating myself.
HULK was an incompetent, bloated, hack job, boring piece of shit by Triumph poops!	Jun 30th, 2005 06:56:15 AM
Silver Joo wrote above how it was "sad that a lot of filmgoers reacted badly towards the Hulk. It asked the audience to care and most didn't." He then adds, "That does not make it bad film, it just does not fit into what Marvel are about right now: profit, marketing, turd polishing." OH PUH-LEEZE. The only thing more laughable is John Lockes statement before that where he says HULK should be compared to AFFLICTION for deepness. What the fuck??? Look, here's a news flash for you guys. Kirby and Lee's green skinned character is NOT supposed to be playing out the drama of AFFLICTION. He's supposed to be a big guy going apeshit and destroying things in his path in a dimbulb rage. The cooler the things he smashes, the more fun it is. That's it. End of deepness. And Marvel is NOT trying to polish a turd -- the truth is, these are only fucking comic books. Not Shakespeare as high browed media critics who never got laid as teenagers like to elevate the material to...they're just fucking comic book characters. Nothing more, nothing less. So get over this whole HULK is "art" business. It was a shitty movie because it failed to deliver the ONE thing people wanted: entertainment. Which was plain and simple. People wanted to see a fucking green giant smash things because THAT'S ALL THE HULK IS ABOUT, PERIOD. Any other high brow crap you try to layer on the character (or other comic properties) is you just kidding yourself about the fact that you're an adult and you hate having to admit to friends you still read comics simply because you like comics. So instead you try to impart some sociological weight to them. Again, THE HULK IS ABOUT SMASHING STUFF -- THAT'S AS DEEP AS IT GETS -- AND THAT'S WHY ANG LEE'S VERSION SUCKED TOTAL ASS.
if you're one of the mass movie goers, see the movie by LuckyYoga	Jun 30th, 2005 07:09:06 AM
in other words if you a fucking moron who enjoys bright colors & shiney objects go see this shitfest of a movie. What a retarded review. I hope this film flops!
Triumph poops, are you saying that I'm not allowed to like H by John-Locke	Jun 30th, 2005 07:32:05 AM
And regarding your statement "Any other high brow crap you try to layer on the character (or other comic properties) is you just kidding yourself about the fact that you're an adult and you hate having to admit to friends you still read comics simply because you like comics
"Spielberg got voted best director ever above Kubrick on this si by Big Dumb Ape	Jun 30th, 2005 08:12:13 AM
Maybe it's because I'm coming in late to this thread and argument, but I'm lost here. What does it say again? John Locke, it would seem pretty logical that Spielberg would come out on top here at AICN given his output of geek natured films. In fact, it makes total sense for Spielberg to come out on top of ALL film polls given his track record and insanely incredible success ratio, not to mention his indisputable impact on mass culture in general. He's clearly the most recognized and popular director in movie history at this point. So I don't know why you would seem to indicate that the majority of film lovers who support him have a low I.Q., unless you're inferring that because he's been so successful it MUST be lowbrow entertainment. I'm not sure I even recall a vote here at this site (the one you're pointing to), so perhaps what you meant was the recent Empire Movie Magazine poll in the UK that made the news where 10,000 people voted Spielberg best director of all time (with Hitchcock coming in second and Scorsese third). But either way, and your argument with Triumph Poops over The Hulk aside, I don't understand where you feel liking Spielberg or even acknowledging that he's the best there has ever been "lowers the IQ of this site." And one more thing. Publicly, I'm sure Spielberg puts on the diplomatic air and will say Kubrick was the better director to be nice to the dead, but I have to believe given his track record and even his own personal and professional ego that in private, at home and amongst friends, even at this point Spielberg would say he's the better director. So whenever you see Spielberg saying Kubrick was better than him and all that, I really think we have to chalk that up to him simply being nice in public towards the dead. So the whole "even he would admit Kubrick was a better director" is debatable (though I think Spielberg would say David Lean was better).
Told you fellow fanboys...I'm looking more right with every by Lost Skeleton	Jun 30th, 2005 08:16:34 AM
...and in a summer filled with downer movies that I love but the general public may hate...FF4 and ...gulp!...Mike Bay's The Island are probably going to be the two flicks that turns the summer box office around...mark my words.
One last time... by Theta	Jun 30th, 2005 08:25:05 AM
I am sick and tired of "Fight Club" being held up as a great adaptation. "Fight Club" the movie is a piece of shit that pissed all over Chuck Palahniuk's book. The book is a harsh and painful look at the Hegelian master/slave dialectic. The movie is about how violent nihilism is sorta cool, which is EXACTLY contrary to the final message of the book.
The Island is an uplifting movie? by JCubedz	Jun 30th, 2005 08:29:54 AM
So a movie about organ harvesting of your clones is supposed to be the feel good movie of the year???
Nice of you to chime in your opinion Big Dumb Ape by John-Locke	Jun 30th, 2005 08:58:21 AM
I'm clearly admitting in my post that people with a similar outlook as myself are in the minority on this site. Have you seen all the hatred being spewed over the last couple of days towards Kong, it's not even out yet and people have already set their opinion in stone because Kong isn't as big as they wanted him to be. The poll I refer to is to be found here http://www.aintitcool.com/resu lts.cgi?id=269 and I have no problem with Spielberg being at the top as it reflects peoples true opinions, I just feel it proves my point that the majority of the people who attend this website on a regular basis have a tendency of displaying populist attitudes towards film, whilst I and many others who frequent here (but still in a slight minority) consider film to be more than just Box Office Numbers and Entertainment. When Spielberg directs a film to equal or better than Dr Strangelove I
Quint, give it the fuck up... by Childe Roland	Jun 30th, 2005 09:18:51 AM
...already. Why in the world do you feel the need to preface two positive (although one markedly more enthused than the other) reviews with some qualifying editorial bullshit about how you question the reviewers' mindsets or motivations? What the hell do you expect people to say other than: "You know, that wasn't anywhere near as bad as I feared" when all your fucking site has been doing is instilling that fear by talking about how bad the movie (that none of you have seen yet) is? Why even post these reviews if you don't think they have value? It's the most half-assed attempt at presenting and diffusing an opposing viewpoint that I've ever seen (and I was a bartender long enough to witness thousands of drunken, idiotic arguments). With just a few lines of completely unnecessary color commentary, you've destroyed any shred of credibility you might have had as a "journalist." Congratulations. I hope Harry at least made it worth your while. As for the Hulk, that movie could have been the breakthrough project that made non-comic fans care about a comic book hero. It had all the elements of a "Frankenstein" classic or a "The Fly"-like horror romance... if only Ang Lee could've resisted the temptation to pepper it with all those "Creepshow"-esque comic book visual trappings. I still enjoy the film, but I enjoy it despite what I feel were some poor directorial and editing choices. I suspect FF won't be anywhere near as deep or symbolic a film, nor will it attempt to be so. It looks, for all purposes, like it sets out to be a fun summer movie and, I suspect, that's pretty much what we'll get. If you think it should be Shakespeare and somehow falls short, then you should go back and read Shakespeare again. He put on his share of fun summer plays between his Hamlets and Romeos and Juliets.
Ok, I have to chime in on this one... by Lost in Uranus	Jun 30th, 2005 09:37:30 AM
Hulk for me was awesome. Matter of fact I own the DVD. Some people liked it and some didnt. But to say that the movie itself (having been directed as it was and turned out as it did) lacked ANY kind of merits...well... is pretty much retarded. Look, I can think of several academy award winning films that bore me to death and I wouldnt sit thru. But that doesnt make em truly bad films does it? Sure it is boring to me, but it is art nonetheless. Someones art. And as far as FF, well...it doesnt really do it for me. Dont know why, but it just doesnt call to me. Maybe its cause I didnt grow up with the characters or ever read the comics. My mother on the other hand, seems to wanna see it. Could it be a generation issue? Hmmmm... The movie will probably turn out ok, and have some cool moments and all, but I'll wait till the DVD comes out to find out. I too have noticed that theaters are now dragging the audience thru 20 minutes of non-stop commercials before the previews, and it really pisses me off. By the time the movie starts Im already in a bad mood and without something to drink. If this shit keeps going I will have to give up going to the movies for good. Fuck those greedy bastards. Fuck em in the ass!
Gotta disagree with you on the book, Theta. by FluffyUnbound	Jun 30th, 2005 09:37:50 AM
It may have been Chuck's intention to pull the old switcheroo meaning-wise in the first ten pages, the way that Burgess did in Clockwork Orange, but the problem [in both cases, actually] is that the setup material is too well executed. It's impossible to read the first 9/10th's of Fight Club and NOT start to have the sneaking suspicion that violent nihilism is pretty cool - unless you're deliberating holding back from reacting to the material emotionally in the way it's designed to make you react. When the setup is executed this much better than the dramatic inversion, you can't get angry at people for holding on to the "fake" message of the setup.
Whoops. by FluffyUnbound	Jun 30th, 2005 09:39:30 AM
My first sentence above makes a lot more sense if it says "the LAST ten pages". As written it makes no sense at all. Sorry, my bad.
Thinking good thoughts.... by sith-vol	Jun 30th, 2005 09:56:39 AM
....that Fantastic Four does really well. I hope it does make more than Batman Begins. Not because I want it to outshine it, but I look at it this way, regardless of if I like the film or not, if one comic book movie does well at the box office the greedy money hounds in Hollywood will greenlight others and it gives us all the chance to find a few good ones mixed in with the garbage.
Has anyone noticed how all movie trailers are now structured ali by cookylamoo	Jun 30th, 2005 10:00:25 AM
The King Kong trailer could be the Fantastic Four Trailer except it has different shots. It even has the same backgound music. I know there's only one studio that makes trailers nowadays, but they could at least deviate from formula enough to seem fresh.
I liked "Hulk." by NeoAngelus	Jun 30th, 2005 10:04:59 AM
I thought it was a pretty good movie. It wasn't without it's share of flaws, but I think that several years down the road, people who once hated it will warm to it, and it will take it's place in the "popular" opinion as one of the good Marvel movies. To me, it already is. That being said, I was worried about this FF movie. The first trailer did nothing for me. Then, when I saw the new trailer before Batman Begins, me and my buddy turned to each other and said, "Oh, all right." Meaning we were finally going to give the movie a fair chance to prove itself. I think it'll be a fun movie to watch. I'm no purist. I realize that in order to make a comic book movie relevant, things need to be changed. Some people just need to remove the bugs from their asses. - n/a
Triumph poops by NeoAngelus	Jun 30th, 2005 10:18:20 AM
You might want to watch a big guy tearing shit up non-stop for 2 hours, but that doesn't make a good movie. Look at Van Helsing. That had lots of action and destruction, and it sucked. What Ang Lee did with the Hulk was well thought out. This is a character who, when enraged, literally becomes a living embodiment of that emotion. There's a lot to delve into with that, and Lee decided to really get into how fucked up Bruce Banner is, mentally. You have to understand, Hulk, from the get-go, isn't just about the big green monster. It's mostly about the man who is trying to keep it under control. It's a modern Jekyll and Hyde. Now the only thing I didn't like about "Hulk" was the final fight with Absorbing Man. That was a little too metaphorical for me. But the movie up to that point, I felt, was well done and very true to the spirit of the book.
Hulk, good and bad by DennisMM	Jun 30th, 2005 10:46:51 AM
Good: 1. Fine performances from most of the primaries other than poor Nick Nolte, stuck in his least-rewarding role since he channelled Chico Marx in "Lorenzo's Oil." 2. Strong visuals by a very talented director. 3. An attempt to incorporate from the comics a certain amount of justification for the Hulk's existence (thank you Peter David and Al Milgrom). 4. Excellent CGI at least some of the time. Bad: 1. The Hulk doesn't appear for ages. 2. The Hulk gets BIGGER, not just stronger. 3. The Hulk as nothing but rage, an approach that never worked in the comics -- unless the Hulk is a person, we have no reason to care about him. 4. Lee's attempts to be "comic booky" by using split screen and multiple "panels." 5. Nick Nolte's performance. 6. The climax, which makes sense neither visually nor dramatically. (Even Peter David, who wrote the "novelization," admitted it was incomprehensible without the script.) I don't own it and haven't rented it. Maybe I should; the technical extras are probably very entertaining.
Silver Marvel has always been about by Sayhey Kid	Jun 30th, 2005 10:58:32 AM
characterisation first. This is why you can have different characters take over for DC heroes (Flash, Green Lantern) and be accepted...because they are icons first, characters second. Wolverine can appear for an entire year out of costume because he doesn't need one. Yes, he's over exposed, but he is much "deeper" than any DC hero: From honor bound warrior, to man vs. animal, to relectant father figure. I like Batman and Superman, but they will never be that diverse. Superman has a personal life BECAUSE of Spider-Man. That being said, Hulk still sucked and not because of the CGI. Acadamey award winning movies bore you? But you ENJOYED the Hulk? I'm all for artsy, but that movie was mess.
Wow, so Hulk was so bad it's cool to love it now? by Drath	Jun 30th, 2005 11:14:50 AM
When did The Hulk mutate into the favorite blacksheep genre movie of geeks at AICN? Did a new wave of teenyboppers slip in without my noticing again? Dammit, would you kids stop growing! The greatness of movies is still decided only by people who were born before 1980, and sure as hell not by anyone born after 1990!
Plants by Doc_McCoy	Jun 30th, 2005 11:43:54 AM
Neither review seems remotely genuine. "If you're one of the mass movie goers, see the movie." "I can't wait to see what the future has in store for these characters." When will these studio plants ever learn?
Why Hulk sucked... by OBSD	Jun 30th, 2005 11:44:33 AM
Lack of respect for the source material. Yes, the movie lacked "Hulk Smash", but it's more than that. The best stuff in the hulk balanced some pretty heavy psychological stuff with the mayhem, and that's why it worked so well. Bruce Banner was changed because he was hit with Gamma Rays, not "nanomeds". He was afflicted with Multiple Personality Disorder because of the abuse from his father when he was a child. The Gamma Rays just brought out the personalities in physical form as the Hulk. The Absorbing man was not his father, but a thug named Crusher Creel. The biggest problem with the Hulk movie wasn't that it was boring, it was that Lee whipped his dick out and pissed all over the source material, and Marvel let him....AND it was boring. Putting your own "stamp" on a franchise just for it's own sake without any respect for the source material is lame, just ask Joel Schumaker.
Not Taco Bell, llephen, Burger King by K-pobuibo	Jun 30th, 2005 11:59:58 AM
And of course, they're going to compare it to the Hulk, which has to be one of the worst, if not THE WORST, superhero movies I've seen (I refuse to see Elektra). It could have been so much better, but the film just collapsed after they captured him and he met with his father. The ending (not the epilogue) had to be one of the biggest "What the Hell was that all about??" movie moments in a long time...
The Hulk = Worse Comic Book Flick Ever by fiester	Jun 30th, 2005 12:01:09 PM
That movie was just unwatchable. No matter how bad you think Blade, Elektra, and Daredevil were at least there were a few decent action sequences in each. Ang Lee needs to stick with the kung-fu.
The Hulk = A Decent Movie by Kielbasa	Jun 30th, 2005 12:19:20 PM
What's painful is these reviews that keep bringing the damn thing up like it was Catwoman or something. I doubt some of these people even saw the thing. Also, it was the closest representation of a comic book (the panels, color, framing) brought to screen, ever.
"I hate the movie I haven't seen" by The_Iceman2288	Jun 30th, 2005 12:20:13 PM
That's the problem with most of the people in these talkback sections and just generally on the internet. See the movie and then say whether or not it was a crap movie. That goes for you as well Harry.
Nick Nolte by DinoDeLaurentiis	Jun 30th, 2005 12:30:04 PM
Wha's a wrong with a Nick Nolte inna the "Lorenzo's Oil?" He was a the fantastico! He was a the magnifico! He made-a me a-pee a-my pants I a love him a so much inna the movie!! And a the Chico Marx? He was a the goddamn a comic genius!
Dino DeLaurentis by John-Locke	Jun 30th, 2005 12:41:15 PM
Your Talkback Persona really makes me laugh each time. don't quit.
The greatness of movies is still decided only by people who were by TonyWilson	Jun 30th, 2005 12:51:22 PM
WTF?? Are you serious on this one Drath? I hope you are not because that makes you sound like a fucking idiot. I was born in 1982, I have ate slept and breathed movies since i was 8 years old and my mum put down in front of The Wizard Of Oz. How does me being 23 and not 27 mean my opinions are any lesS valid? I haven't really said much on the Hulk issue and I hardly ever come down and out right attack anyone personally on this site. Your comments reek not only of jealousy and ego but downright ignorance. Hell it maybe that people born born before 1980 have more say in the media but that doesn't mean what they say is automatically correct. We will be here after you are obsolete and put in your fucking nursing home where you can go piss your pants and moan about how it was in your day. In fact you are doing that last bit right now. I'd say grow up but you obviously think you have with your oh so superior attitude.
Here I am again, defending Hulk and other unrealistic expectatio by oisin5199	Jun 30th, 2005 12:54:19 PM
All superhero comic books are not created equal. Not every comic book film should be about "Hulk smash" and shit blowing up. By the same token, not every comic book film should be about deep, brooding issues. I've always thought the psychological issues around Hulk, the Jekyll and Hyde stuff, the repressed id, the childlike rage was always more interesting than the Hulk smash (and contrary to what the Hulksmashers would have us think, there was plenty of Hulk Smash in Lee's film - the tank, the lab, the base, the streets - what more do you want? The true challenge, if they do another one, is to present the more verbal, articulate Hulk as the id that can express itself, without making it look silly - that would be a Gollum-like achievement). Anyway, the Hulk lends itself to interesting psychological interpretations, as does Batman and even Superman. Batman and Daredevil can deal with issues of vengeance, morality and ethics, and vigilantism. X-Men lends itself well to social issues. Spiderman maybe about teen angst and responsibility cliches. Fantastic Four? Family issues is stretching it a bit (no pun intended). If I was to make any comic book a family fun popcorn romp, it would be FF. They have unending technology, own their own building, wear funny uniforms, and fight ridiculous villains. It doesn't need to be deep or dark or brooding. The tone of the film should fit the material, period. I'd really like to know what all all film experts would do differently with a FF adaptation. And don't talk about the Thing's "look" or Doom should be a dictator. Those are fanboy nitpicks that have nothing to do with the tone of the movie. Frankly, I can't think of one FF villain that wouldn't be totally silly onscreen. And yeah, Doom is cool with his mask and attitude, but he's probably one of the most boring, uninteresting, predictable of the major Marvel villains. So if they have to change him around to make him more relevant or interesting, or closer to the other characters, so what? I haven't heard any legitimate complaints so far, just these usual fanboy whinings. Maybe I'll feel differently once I've seen it.
So... the bottom line is, If you liked The Hulk, you might swall by Ardee-El	Jun 30th, 2005 01:03:09 PM
Some reviewers are already saying the cheapie 1994 version is better. Where's the petition to get that one officially released?
Dino does rule. by docfalken	Jun 30th, 2005 01:09:18 PM
Though I feel guilty about laughing as hard as I do.
Hulk again ... by Silver_Joo	Jun 30th, 2005 01:21:30 PM
I felt that Lee appraoched it like a new writer would the comic - with an ethos that said it was Lee's turn in the sand pit. He did nothin more radical to Hulk than Peter David did in the 1980s by intellectualising the Hulk and giving him a rational for doing what he did in the comics. The Hulk is a character that begs to be explored and Lee did exactly that. The Hulk is not about smashing things, certain characterisations of the Hulk (cough Todd MacFarlane!) are but generally this a lazy misconception of what Hulk is about. Why try and make Spiderman out to be so emotionally complex when one of the only writers who has been arsed to explore that emotional content only did it a few months ago in Amazing Spiderman? All comic book heroes are ciphers for the writer. They can do what they want, so why can't film directors do the same instead of rushing out some rubbish that vaguely looks like silver or bronze age comic books with a post-modern twist (ie product placement)? As fans we are crippling the way in which popular culture is presented on screen by wanting Hulk to smash and Spiderman to swing; if you want these characters on screen you have to accept changes and new directions or else how will they remain relevant for the next fifty years? The reason we get films that look as precariously balanced in terms of being dross or half decent as Fantastic Four is because people come to sites like this and whinge about how it's just a film etc. Sure it is - so why are we here typing and caring? We deserve better but only if we are willing to ask for it in a constructive way rather than accepting a piece of crap because wow, they didn't change the costume at least.
"Hulk" is like... by Christopher3	Jun 30th, 2005 01:25:10 PM
"Dune." Big-budget genre pic from an untested art-house guy. A mess if you see it in the theater, but somewhat engrossing if you take the time to parse it at home.
Hulk bad by coop	Jun 30th, 2005 01:34:11 PM
It's laughable that people are defending the Hulk. Yes the idea behind it was interesting and it could have been good in theory but the execution was horrible. Some of you act like it was too slow paced for the masses like Shawshank or Memento, but in fact it was too slow paced like Godzilla.
Christopher a 3 by DinoDeLaurentiis	Jun 30th, 2005 01:35:53 PM
A big budget genre pic, from a the untested art-house guy? You mean, like a the "Batman, He's a Beginning"?
Hulk bad! Fantastic Four, Rental! by ZeroCorpse	Jun 30th, 2005 02:05:27 PM
Ang Lee's Hulk was insipid. It started out fine, but then quickly lost me with hulk dogs, Absorbing Dad, and awful CGI that took me out of the film entirely. They wasted the Hulk on a psychological study of child abuse, basically, when they could have skipped all that and used him in a "Defenders" or "Avengers" movie to much better effect. When a 70s TV show is more engaging than a 90s big-budget flick, there's a problem. Watching The Hulk (Crouching Hulk, Hidden Plotline) was like watching paint dry. If FF bears any resemblence to the waste of time that was the Hulk, then I'll go see Batman Begins again, instead.
The most annoying thing in the Hulk was Jennifer Conneley's by cookylamoo	Jun 30th, 2005 02:09:53 PM
Not the lick I'd like to see from her, that's for sure.
My opinion of what went wrong with the Hulk. by Dokkalvar	Jun 30th, 2005 02:10:27 PM
This is just voicing my personal opinion, but I believe a lot of people really miss the point when it comes to why the Hulk was so ill received. It wasn't because the Hulk doesn't show up until almost an hour into the movie, or that there weren't enough explosions or even The Hulk's lack of "Hulk Smash." dialogue; in fact, I really hated the creative choices of film taken from the comics, especially the Hulk
As disappointing as HULK was overall, it still had one of the be by odysseus	Jun 30th, 2005 02:21:40 PM
The desert rampage sequence -- from the time Hulk breaks out of the military compound, till he hits the streets of San Francisco -- is pure bliss. Too bad all the Freudian stuff was so poorly handled.
My two cents by Lost Skeleton	Jun 30th, 2005 02:35:17 PM
The Hulk didn't suck. The critics liked it...the only problem is that Ang Lee made an expensive art house movie while most summer crowds wanted a Hulk smash fest. The Hulk t.v. show didn't help...a lot of people didn't know the Hulk was that big from the comics.
Dokkalvar nailed it... by Sayhey Kid	Jun 30th, 2005 02:39:29 PM
and he didn't even have to bring up the military's brilliant idea to expose Bruce to his father when they KNOW anger turns him into the Hulk. Brooding facial expression does not a social reject make.
and apprantly Lost Skeleton... by Sayhey Kid	Jun 30th, 2005 02:41:06 PM
has read NONE of this thread.
Dokkalvar, Hulk by Wil_Of_Iron	Jun 30th, 2005 03:05:49 PM
Dokkalvar, you pretty much hit the nail on the head dude. I think Mr.Lee over shot with the drama, and we were all literally beaten over the head with the whole repressed emotions theme. Now ultimately, what I believe they were trying to show us, was that because of repressed emotions, potentially there is a Hulk, residing within all of us. It was just grossly mishandled. There is a lot of psychological material that could have been explored and expressed, basically, The Hulk should've and could've been approached they way Batman Begins was. Another royal screw-up with the movie was making Bruce's father the Absorbing Man. First and foremost, the Absorbing Man is a Thor Villain!! I think of myself as comic-book fan boy, but I don't take it to the extreme of these other dudes out here, that want to see a every exact detail of comic brought to the big screen, despite the fact that it'll look stupid and unreal. However, I don't like to see radical departures like this one take place either. 'Nuff Said.
Dokkalvar and WillofIron by oisin5199	Jun 30th, 2005 03:15:11 PM
I appreciate both your reasoned arguments (finally) why Hulk didn't work for you. Some of it I don't agree with - I felt that Bana and Connelly's performances conveyed the lostness of their characters. I didn't need any flashbacks to their relationship. Sometimes showing isn't better than telling, especially when the telling is subtle or even non-verbal. My main problem with your arguments is that this is the first time over the past few months I've seen these kinds of criticisms. So I don't buy for a second that this is why most people didn't like the film. All the opinions expressed on this site have been about the Hulksmash issue or that it was boring (people didn't like drama when they wanted Hulksmash). And I can't quote any numbers but I thought the only people who had a problem with the movie were the fanboys, not the critics OR the viewing public on the whole. It still did pretty well.
Dokkalvar, one more thing by oisin5199	Jun 30th, 2005 03:21:43 PM
Another point of disagreement I have is about the repressed emotions vs. mutant storyline. Though I agree that maybe some more evidence of Bruce's repressed emotions might have helped, I don't agree that the mutant thing canceled out the repressed emotions. I think they work well together because they both contributed to Banner's transformation. One is more literal (albeit sci-fi hokey) and one is metaphorical/psychological. I don't think one is meant to cancel each other out. Lee's working with a theme. I'm trying to remember a deleted scene in which Banner's trying to present his research and there's some fascinating metaphorical connections between the science and the theme. I'll have to see it again.
oisin5199 by Wil_Of_Iron	Jun 30th, 2005 03:29:47 PM
Yo!! What's up Oisin...I hear ya' man....actually I've had these criticisms pent up for quite some time....actually, since I first saw it in a theater. And the number of reasons I've heard with regards to why people didn't like it are too numerous and too dumb. I've heard everything from, "he flys", "he's not 15ft tall in the comic", to..."why couldn't they just get Lou Ferrigno, to play the Hulk again?" Quite maddening I tell you....Me personally..I'm glad that the one thing they could've screwed up, they got right, and that's the creature. I'm also glad, that he didn't speak...had he said Hulk Smash...I probably would've hurled! Now come on Oisin....even you have to admit, the creature showed a lot more range of emotion than Eric Bana. I also know it did well at the box office, and overall with overseas totals and dvd sales, which definitely guarantees us a sequel, and that's damn fine in my book, because it will be a chance I feel, to redeem themselves, and put an end to the "other fan boys" wimpering! Heh! Heh!
Are these even reviews? Where's the stuff about Mr. Fantast by Jonny_Dr_Thunder	Jun 30th, 2005 03:49:35 PM
Lordy, I could have written both of these reviews just by watching the trailers, havin' a six pack and having a dream that this movie might actually be worth more than a wheelbarrow load of dead rats in a tampon factory. Seriously.... this movie scares me. Then there's this horseshit: "...and never takes itself too seriously like the X-Men films have at times." Awww man, the seriousness in those movies is what MADE it work for me. Thank GOD for Bryan Singer's ability to make those movies more than a Saturday morning cartoon. I can't believe this reviewer thinks being serious is a FLAW. Wow. Dude, there's a movie you'd LOVE if you don't like all this seriousness. It's called "Batman and Robin."
Jessica Alba is so fine I would crawl 30 miles naked on my hands by manga junkie	Jun 30th, 2005 03:50:46 PM
Is this all you guys can pick on?? The Hulk was very well done. Sure, the poodle bit was just a touch much and with that ending that just didn't work, the movie is not perfect. But if you wanna go after bad comic book movies, these all four of the first "Batman" films to bust a stitch over...or look at "Elektra" should have rocked, sucked ass!! This one has a real chance by the look of it...and yes, Jessica Alba is the sexiest tombay beanpole...yada, yada, yada...
Hulk in the end didn't work because... by JUSTICE41	Jun 30th, 2005 03:50:47 PM
He was too big. There's only so much a normal person will believe before they toss up the mitts and go home. Also the opening sequence should have been thrown in as flash backs. In fact If they started the movie off Mid transformation when banner is confronting Betty, then precede to tell the story how he arrived on that street and why the Military was after him,that to me would have been interesting. They should have juxtaposed the old Banner experiments with the newer stuff he was doing in cross flashbacks. The Hulks roar should have been deeper and louder and not sound like he was gargleing. . Some of the military stuff could have been pared down and tightened so we wouldn't have to watch a chopper or two flying for ever. The editing of the story wasthe major flaw not anything else. I imported the dvd into my puter and re-edited it just like I describe up there. It played much better and much more coherently. The Hulk Should not have been a straight line story.
Frankenstein's Monster!! by Ribbons	Jun 30th, 2005 03:51:22 PM
With that pretentious heading out of the way, here I go: we really are destroying the way that comic book movies are made. With the abysmal performance of 'Hulk' and the unceremonious firing of Bryan Singer, the last of the auteur-driven Marvel films will probably be whichever sequel to Spider-Man Raimi finally decides to hang his hat on. 'Fantastic Four' and 'X-Men 3' are prime examples of how micromanaging can corrupt a movie's potential. Like I've said before, I urge anyone who hasn't yet to go seek out the Yahoo.com clip of the Human Torch snowboarding--it's clearly meant to stimulate the crowd that thinks snowboarding equals cool (a crowd that I'm not even sure really exists, but Hollywood's got a history of grossly underestimating the public). It's scored to a Sum 41 tune, for Zoroaster's sake. This is what I mean when I say that our whining is destroying superhero movies: there has to be something to keep every possible demographic entertained, because they're not willing to sit down and watch someone else's vision of the character without feeling offended or uninterested. And so, here's Jessica Alba's tits. Here's every lame one-liner we can think of. Here's Johnny at the X Games. Here's Reed and Sue, talking in hushed, luvvy-duvvy tones while watching a movie (how meta is that?). While I'm sure that the prospect of seeing an attractive actress' cleavage is perfectly fine by most of us here, the appeal of the other handful of things on the studio's checklist is fairly limited. Sitting through them becomes an exercise in patience, or maybe an excuse to check out until special effects call your attention to the screen again, and so the movie becomes a tedious slog, and it's worse than the "tedious slogs" that were 'Hulk' and the middle part of 'Spider-Man 2' because you don't even have the comfort of knowing that it meant something special to whoever was involved with its creation. It's just there. You try to please everyone and end up pleasing very few in the process. And then I hear people who really couldn't give a damn about what Ang Lee was interested in doing with 'Hulk' say that it was ruined by "too much emotional angst," which is to say that the movie should have been a schizophrenic mish-mash. It's like that episode of "Futurama" where the robot has a switch that makes his emotions go from Irreverent to Maudlin. I'm of the camp of people who thinks that the idea of an angsty Hulk (including, YES, "Absorbing Man Dad," which is the least clever and self-sufficient insult for the movie I've ever heard), even if only because Ang Lee liked the idea, but thought the results weren't so hot. Which isn't to say the movie didn't have its share of great moments, but the dialogue was more abstract than an episode of "Ghost in the Shell." At the same time, it's one of the Marvel movies I admire most because it took a risk by making itself unconventional. And it's a shame that we'll probably never see another Marvel movie take similar risks. But good news! I've heard that Ghost Rider is gonna have THREE spikes on each shoulder! Just like in the comics! Isn't THAT what really matters? Sigh.
Oops. by Ribbons	Jun 30th, 2005 04:01:47 PM
Instead of "thinks the idea," that should be "likes the idea." And for the record, I'm perfectly fine with the idea of a Mr. Fixit-esque sequel. But I liked all the "touchy-queery crap" in the first one just fine too.
Too much "Angst" from Ang by Twisted Wisdom	Jun 30th, 2005 04:28:19 PM
People go to movies to get away from all the crap they have to deal with on a day to day basis. In Hulk, Ang Lee continuously throws all that negativity into the audience's face, and you can't escape it. It's not that it's a bad movie, it's just that it wasn't what people thought it was going to be. Instead of being enlightening, it was too depressing. Not what you want in a big summer movie. I think some people found the whole child abuse angle a bit too disturbing. Now they're going to have to wait maybe 8-10 years before they can do another Hulk movie. Like Batman, they're going to have to wait for the stench of the last one to go away before they can bring in someone to do it right.
Good one Ribbons by John-Locke	Jun 30th, 2005 04:33:36 PM
Sounds like I dig Hulk a bit more than you but you make some damn fine points there and not just on Hulk but the whole Comic Book Adaptation mess that we're currently in. On a side note, the whole Hulk Dogs thing worked incredibly well in my opinion, If you see it on DVD you will be able to see what
Oisin5199 by Dokkalvar	Jun 30th, 2005 04:38:12 PM
Well I've been staying on message about the Hulk movie since I saw it, what? two summers ago. It's been awhile. I honestly believe that the Hulk is A great human archetype and that many, especially those inclined to read comic books, can easily relate. Almost anyone, given enough external pressure will combust, be it verbally or physically, and through the character of the Hulk we should have been given the ramifications, the wonders and the dangers of our own actions. I can only disagree with you about the way Banner and Ross are portrayed in their scenes together because honestly their relationship either doesn't make sense or just isn't all that interesting. It's given to us as if it's a result of his emotional repression, but I don't ever get the sense that Banner is truly emotionally repressed, only distant and, well, boring. I mean there are plenty of boring people in the world and not because their burying their feelings in any way; at least that
Umm... not to nitpick, but... by Ribs	Jun 30th, 2005 04:52:30 PM
... isn't this supposed to be a FF talkback?
we are discussing Hulk because Fantastic Four might have been ha by John-Locke	Jun 30th, 2005 05:00:28 PM
Fox had a better audience reaction to the Hulk. Ang's novel approach seems to have far reaching ramifications for the Comic Book to Screen process.
FF? by Dokkalvar	Jun 30th, 2005 05:01:59 PM
I believe my previous tirade is a representation of my interest in this fantastic four movie. ahyem-- Nuff...said.
I Saw the Hulk When I Was Unemployed... by Flem_Snopes	Jun 30th, 2005 05:37:07 PM
...and almost killed myself.
Let's bring this back to the FF movie.... by Mr. Dogfart	Jun 30th, 2005 05:51:58 PM
I'd eat a mile of Jessica Alba's shit just to see where it came from!
I saw the hulk in a matinee by Bubastis	Jun 30th, 2005 05:58:43 PM
when there was a bunch of kids on school holidays, all here to see the big green monster. an hour in, mucho talk and angst, and each one of these little bastards had completley given up, and decided it would be more fun to turn the theatre into a fucking funhouse. i gave them the old "Shhhhh!" as loud as i could, you know what these little cunts started doing? every fucking one of them? they all started going "Shhh!" , each louder than the other. It sounded like a goddamn silent fart competition. So, that kinda ruined the hulk fr me. I bought it later on dvd, and with no little paedo-bait around to piss me off, i kinda enjoyed it. but then, i had a fast forward option.
One problem with FF by DennisMM	Jun 30th, 2005 06:22:58 PM
is that, like "Batman Begins," the female lead looks ridiculous in the part. Susan Storm, in the early comics, was a smart young woman brave enough to help steal a rocket. Jessica Alba MIGHT have been able to pull that off, though I doubt it. As a brilliant biophysicist or whatever Sue is in the movie, Alba doesn't work. She's 24 and looks younger and not all that bright. Susan Storm does not need to haul 'em out to be an interesting character. Had they cast a vaguely interesting actor, I'd feel better about the movie. As is, all I really want to see is if Chiklis can act through the rubber.
No way Ang Lee is going to do another one by eule	Jun 30th, 2005 06:42:59 PM
and I hope it's not true that they want to put a guy in a suit for the next one. I think the FX were quite good, maybe they should go for a slightly darker skin color. The one thing that disturbed me the most was that I didn't feel sympathetic towards Bruce Banner/the Hulk. What they did really good though was showing his shattered childhood and thereby explaining the Hulk's origin. It's just that I cared much more about his comic counterpart who seemed more tragic and at the same time heroic to me.
Dokkalvar by oisin5199	Jun 30th, 2005 07:09:51 PM
Nice argument - I can totally see your interpretation. I guess the way I read it was not that Bruce was an angry person (emotional) in the sense you're talking about. Rather, I felt like the rage was deeper - more like a quiet frustration, an impotence that usually leads to the creation of a villain. And in a sense he does play like a Frankenstein's monster who wants to be left alone. (tangent - I love the trippiness of the desert stuff after his rage - I could definitely see the Crouching Hulk part there.) In fact, Hulk's certainly not a hero in the traditional sense, except when it comes to Betty. My wife and I have had endless debates over that because she has a problem with Beauty and the Beast plots where the only thing that can calm the Savage Beast is the love of a woman, maybe because one could argue it perpetuates a myth about male violence (especially towards women). So I guess I'm saying I don't really disagree with you, I just read it differently and it worked for me. It all comes down to writing choices, directing choices, and acting choices. Which makes me very curious to see how they'll do it differently. Though Arad's "diet Hulk" comments frighten me. And though I usually agree with Ribbons, I really hope he's wrong for this one.
The word "popcorn" is never a good sign in a review... by GreatWhiteNoise	Jun 30th, 2005 07:47:44 PM
Nothing screams "total lack of depth, texture or character development" like "eat your popcorn". I'm with Harry. No sir, I don't like it.
wishful thinking by oisin5199	Jun 30th, 2005 09:51:42 PM
If you wish to wallow in the shallow, brobdingnag, that's your business. Each person is entitled to his or her interpretation. But to say that there's absolutely nothing there in the character and anyone who disagrees is you is just wrong is pretty obnoxious and dictatorial. I think enough people have posted here and other threads in the last few weeks with varying opinions on the Hulk, demonstrating that a wide variety of opinions is possible. So, I'll keep my opinion that Lee's Hulk was an interesting, thoughtful and entertaining film, thank you.
brobdingnag by Ribbons	Jun 30th, 2005 11:42:43 PM
By that logic, movies about school shootings are more interesting when they get rid of all that introspection crap and skip right to the shooting. But that's cheap rhetoric, right? Okay, staying strictly within the realm of film, by that logic, there'd be no 'Taxi Driver.'
"You won't rike me when I'm Ang-Lee!" by Ogre	Jul 1st, 2005 01:16:17 AM
Somebody had to say it....
Okay, I've seen the trailers, read some reviews, I'm goi by Anla'shok	Jul 1st, 2005 01:25:13 AM
and wait for blockbuster. My instincts told me Batman Begins was not going to thrill me, yet I wasted my money to learn what I already knew. Not this time. As for the Hulk, yes Ang Lee should've been smacked around a bit for messing with the source material. Growing Hulk, nano-machines or whatever, and absorbing dad equal a bit fat fucking boo. BUT, the movie is still one of my favorites do to some exquisitly executed Hulk scenes most notably the Desert sequence. Pure one hundred percent iconic Hulk. So Far, Blade, The Crow, Batman 1&2, Superman 1&2, Ghost World, and Sin City are the only adaptations I would vouch for. I have a growing feeling "Sky High" Is going to be my favorite superhero movie this summer.
adult swim by llephen	Jul 1st, 2005 01:37:37 AM
has anybody noticed the bootleg adult swim Fantastic Four ads that run during adult swim? Man, i HATE this movie already.
Silver_Joo and Bendis by The Finn	Jul 1st, 2005 01:47:03 AM
Just as a counterpoint SJ, I gotta say Bendis' work with Daredevil is some of the best ever in comics...and I hate the character!(might be why I readily accepted Affleck's casting) Powers just got interesting again (Self-righteous, power-resenting, cop/hottie gets powers and commits/covers-up murder.)Nobody is doing complicated/ flawed characters like BMB. But this is about FF, and though it is a shame Mr. F. isn't, if the Thing/Torch banter is there, so am I. And do we really need the scum who use terms like "c$%t-raping"? Ban the women-hating bastards. At least until they grow up.
Saw It Last Night by SuperMac	Jul 1st, 2005 12:19:26 PM
I saw it last night and even though it wasn't perfect, it was a lot of fun. The Ben and Johnny relationship was great. Lots of laughs there. If I had any real complaint it would be about Doctor Doom. Doom's a great character but in this movie you really get the feeling he was just thrown in so that they could say they had a bad guy. His motivation was pretty weak and he really didn't get much screen time. Anyway that's my 2 cents.
Hulk? Fantastic Four? by MaguaSynfield	Jul 1st, 2005 01:51:44 PM
Whose bloody talkback is this? As far as I know, Ang Lee's Hulk pretty much put an end to the "Hulk" francise, so what's the point of the fan-boy v.s. haters pissing contest? And what's its relationship to the FF movie? None at all? That's just what I thought. Anyway, I'll see this movie regardless of whose schvincter is unloaded at it, or whose lips are pressing up against its ass. Casting looks good, production values seem up to industry standards...the only lingering question is the script. After getting geeked up over WOTWs & feeling somewhat less than satisfied at the end of two hours, I've lowered the bar on FF to this; entertain me. Screw the "popcorn" movie label, summer blockbuster, whatever. Enterfuckingtain me, & I mean now. Please?
Comparing Blade 3 to Elektra is frankly an insult to Elektra by LordSoth	Jul 1st, 2005 01:55:23 PM
The only problem with Elektra was that it didn't fully develop the interesting villains and instead actually examined the character of Elektra. Whereas, Blade 3 spent too much time developing a villain that was boring, stupid, lame, and frankly a ripoff of much better versions of the cologne commerical Dracula-type.
India Rubber Man by MaguaSynfield	Jul 1st, 2005 01:56:12 PM
Of course, if they really wanted to gas up the viewship for this, then a Sue Storm/Reed Richards sex scene, ala Team America, should have been included. The possiblities regarding "Mr. Fantastic's" trouser trout are staggering, but I'm pretty sure the ratings board would crap bowling balls & thumb tacks. But. Just. Think. Of the possiblities for a moment.
Elektra looked really nice.... by Mr. Profit	Jul 1st, 2005 06:43:30 PM
The film looked like they spent a couple of bucks. The films major problem was that there was literally NO ACTION. The film introduced too many villains and Elektra dispatches them fairly quickly. Too bad though, if they spent money on a good fight choreographer, had Elektra actually fight Typhoid Mary and hype the Kirigi fight more, it would have probably surpassed Daredevil. In hindsight was not a total disaster but a shining example of making a mediocre film in the name of making a quick buck. Jen Garner is deserving of more, since she seems to be one of the only actresses who is game to do action films. Everyone else seems to be concerned with being glamour pusses.
Hot Ass-Kicking Chick Shows by napalm68	Jul 2nd, 2005 07:00:21 AM
I have a thing for hot ass kicking chick shows. Buffy, Dark Angel, Alias. Elektra. And yeah, I'm with Mr. Dogfart on Alba, even though I'm not into that kind of shit (pun intended). :P I really enjoyed Elektra though. Dunno why it was so harshly taken. But I'm biased.
Hulk by bcharm	Jul 3rd, 2005 03:52:50 AM
Looks like my review kicked off a Hulk discussion. Btw, I'm not grouping the Hulk with Electra or Blade 3. I didn't even bother seeing those movies. But did anyone notice that Nolan and Ang Lee both did fight scenes that were in the dark and impossible to make out? I'm thinking to make a really good movie, you need a director like Nolan for character development and depth and then someone like John Woo as an assistant director for the action. P.S. By mass movie goer, I'm talking about people who will go see movies that reek of crap. Why? Because they have nothing else better to do.
bcharm by Bulldoggie	Jul 3rd, 2005 01:38:36 PM
who cares nerd! I'll give your "reveiw" a 2/10 and lay-off the frickin Hulk.
For the love of God stop!!! by attizachi420	Jul 4th, 2005 12:06:10 AM
Though it is great to see a couple of positive reviews for this film, I am so fucking sick of the senseless negative jabs being taken on A.I.C.N. Just post the reviews don't analize them. I for one can't wait to see this most anticipated of Marvel adaptations. There have been comic book to movie discrepencies with most of the great ones so far. Hell The Green Goblin alone was almost enough to make you run screaming from the theater at first sight. I don't know what is up the collective asses of the A.I.C.N contributers about this flick, but let it go. Let's all at least see it before we start ripping it apart.
I wish Jessica Alba liked me. by DarthCorleone	Jul 4th, 2005 01:27:29 AM

Wow you guys really liked the Hulk huh? by bcharm	Jul 4th, 2005 09:42:36 PM
I prefer geek, but whatever. My first time writing a review and I get ripped on for referring to another movie I thought most people agreed was bad. Come on! Even my friend who idolizes Ang Lee and thinks he can do no wrong didn't like the movie. Oh well. Never knew the Hulk movie had such a cult following.
people are actually DEFENDING the Hulk? by minderbinder	Jul 5th, 2005 02:26:48 PM
What a boring piece of shit. And yes, I "get" the movie. Nice direction doesn't save what's otherwise a turd. F4 I couldn't care less about.
the cinematic FF were jerks at NYC signing... by G_R	Jul 5th, 2005 03:00:07 PM
further proof... www.iconsoffright.com/FF.htm
If they got Ben and Johnny right, it'll be good. by Voice O. Reason	Jul 5th, 2005 06:39:41 PM
Nobody gives a shit about Reed or Susan.
HULK IS GOOD!!!! Quit your bellyaching!!! by AnamorphicRulez!	Jul 5th, 2005 06:55:34 PM
Quit wasting time here and rent out the Hulk DVD. Better yet wait for it come in HD on Starz. DVD is good quality and it's anamorphic. For those that don't like it to bad. Go read your comic books and write something more creative instead of this dribble you keep posting on here.

Talkbacks

A few more FANTASTIC FOUR reviews from NYC pop in!!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks