|
Movies Books Music Food Tv Shows Technology Politics Video Games Parenting Fashion Green Living more >

Lunch » Tags » Movies » Reviews » Hulk (2003) » User review

Hulk (Widescreen 2-Disc Special Edition) (2003)

A film directed by Ang Lee

< read all 11 reviews

CHARACTER DRIVEN FILM DESERVES CREDIT

  • Aug 16, 2010
Rating:
+4
Hulk (Widescreen 2-Disc Special Edition)

HULK

People hate this film and honestly I don't know why, seriously I have no clue what the problem is. I will agree that this movie is not a classic but I really feel like every time I see it I have watched a truly entertaining film. I think this film is a lot like the comics or at least a lot like some versions of the comics, and it is really a great story. I think that this film has a lot of heart which is unusual for this type of film, most comic adaptations are action based as were this one seems more character driven. This film was not given the credit it deserved and neither did the cast or crew.

Bruce Banner is a young researcher that is not only in love with his fellow co worker but is also drawn to studying gamma radiation. Of course every one knows that an accident happens at the lab that exposes him to those rays and when those rays mesh with the present inside his body that his long lost father left him, well he turns green. From here we have a whole story that involves love, a father who only wants to use his "experiment" I mean son, and the military. All of this put together makes for one interesting film, a lot better then I thought it would be. Plus the battle at the end is cool and that is always a plus.

Director Ang Lee who is a wonderful filmmaker did a marvelous job with this film, he turned what could have been just your basic comic movie into a more dramatic tale of tragedy. His direction in this film can be felt all through out the finished product and I really think that he was the perfect choice for this film. Credit of course should also go to writers James Schamus, John Turman, and Michael France who really did something unexpected with this film. This movie is a real emotional based story that relies more on the characters then the action, those three should be complimented for penning this. Frederick Elmes shot this film masterfully and Tim Squyres's editing is flawless, every one should be commended. Eric Bana is completely believable as Bruce Banner and does a real good job with this part, lot of people said this part should have went to some one else. Jennifer Connelly portrays Betty Ross extremely well and I don't think any one would disagree with me on that. Sam Elliott, Josh Lucas, and Cara Buono all are good in this film as well and each of them really make this film all the more entertaining. But it is Nick Nolte in my opinion who really steals the show on this one as Bruce's long lost father who is extremely obsessed with continuing his work. So much so that he doesn't even care about his own son although it seems that he does for a while. In fact it is the dynamic between him and Eric Bana that really make this film, very emotional between these two.

Of course not every thing about this film is great, there are a few things that keep this from being a classic. I think the main thing that brings this film down a little in many peoples minds is the length. This is actually a fairly long film that at times feels like it is dragging, so I can understand that. I think because this was more character driven and played on the emotion of the characters a lot it tended to let everything play out a bit slowly. Another thing is that the CGI in this film is not exactly the greatest ever, in fact the Hulk looks more cartoonish at times then intimidating.

Still even with those flaws I still think that this was a good movie, much better then most people give it credit for. Who knows maybe because so many others hated it I liked it, but I did.

Also this film has some great special features including a nice commentary by Ang Lee

CHARACTER DRIVEN FILM DESERVES CREDIT CHARACTER DRIVEN FILM DESERVES CREDIT CHARACTER DRIVEN FILM DESERVES CREDIT CHARACTER DRIVEN FILM DESERVES CREDIT

What did you think of this review?

Helpful
12
Thought-Provoking
12
Fun to Read
12
Well-Organized
12
Post a Comment
August 20, 2010
I didn't think it was all that bad, and I did like the cast. I always get a kick out of Sam Elliot and Eric Bana is drool worthy on occasion.
 
August 16, 2010
Despite my feelings about the weird ending of the film when Nick Nolte turns into a giant bubble and pops (WTF?!), I also liked this film. I think it's actually better than "The Incredible Hulk" on most levels. I really appreciated the cast and the acting.
August 17, 2010
I think the Nolte character was channeling properties of the Absorbing Man.
August 17, 2010
He was, but without ever really explaining why, and turning into a bubble was just silly.
 
August 16, 2010
actually I was one of the few who actually thought that this movie was good and reminiscent of Paul Jenkins' run in the comics. Sure the CGI looked fake but I liked the way it had that brooding atmosphere though there was too much angst admittedly. Thanks for the review!
August 16, 2010
Agreed WP I liked this one as well as you can see, I also dropped a review for the second film and another wrestling review.
 
1
More Hulk (2003) reviews
review by . August 04, 2010
HULK SNORE!!!!
You know, screwing up the Hulk is like messing up instant pudding.  With pudding, pour mix into a bowl, add milk, stir, let cool and then eat.  Hulk is a guy who when he gets mad, grows into a 10 foot green monster of a man who's super strong, can leap into low orbit and has boundless rage once he gets going.  It's a big green monster who smashes up anything in his path.  How do you mess that up?  Well heres one way to do it.      I would love …
Quick Tip by . August 05, 2010
Sleep inducing and arty piece of a comic hero that should be anything but. When the action starts, it's good but otherwise, pull up the blankie and pillow
review by . April 29, 2009
What could have been a great movie, slogs through the first hour at an excruciatingly slow pace.  Very weird directing where the screen splits into four different scenes, does more harm than good.  Bruce Banner, a child of parents that lived in a military base that tested nuclear devices like Los Alamos, grows up to be a scientist too.  When he is exposed to a dose of gamma radiation, the genetically mutated cells in his body go crazy and he is transformed into the Hulk using Shrek-like …
review by . June 13, 2008
4.5/5 stars     "Hulk" 2003 is very different from what you would expect from a typical summer popcorn creature-feature. From the advertising campaign it appeared to be a mindless special effects extravaganza with little to no plot whatsoever; AKA Summer Fun. For those who went to see it with that mindset it was undoubtedly a not so pleasant surprise. Most of whom who saw this on its initial theatrical release obviously had not foreseen Ang Lee's philosophical drama, and they …
review by . June 20, 2006
True the movie starts slow, with admirable character development. By the time the Hulk appears, every one's motivations are known with each personality sharply distinguished. I have to admit that I was taking aback on how he look on screen. Alot of people describe him as "Shrek on Steroids" or "Angry Shrek," which I don't blame them because that's not the way we know the Hulk.     Ang Lee loves showing humanity and human frailty in his stories as he has done exceptionally in …
review by . May 12, 2004
posted in Movie Hype
Pros: Special effects…     Cons: Special effects, acting     The Bottom Line: The Hulk suffered from an over use of computer aided graphics, and it destroyed the movie for me. I like my hero’s powerful, but somewhat human thank you.     Plot Details: This opinion reveals major details about the movie''s plot. As a young boy growing up in middle, well okay lower middle America, I dined on a regular menu of Marvel Comics. My favorites were …
review by . February 05, 2004
posted in Movie Hype
What could have been a great movie, slogs through the first hour at an excruciatingly slow pace. Very weird directing where the screen splits into four different scenes, does more harm than good. Bruce Banner, a child of parents that lived in a military base that tested nuclear devices like Los Alamos, grows up to be a scientist too. When he is exposed to a dose of gamma radiation, the genetically mutated cells in his body go crazy and he is transformed into the Hulk using Shrek-like animation techniques.The …
review by . December 17, 2003
Ang Lee is a great director...let there be no doubt. CROUCHING TIGER, ICE STORM, SENSE & SENSIBILITY. All TRULY outstanding films. So it comes as no surprise that he would try to bring greatness to a genre little familiar with greatness...the movie comic / superhero genre.On many levels, Ang Lee did a great thing. He attempted to REALLY delve into the emotional angst of his characters...to show use in a "believable" manner how Hulk could have come into being. The opening credits for the movie are …
review by . November 11, 2003
posted in Movie Hype
"Hulk" was a disappointment. I hate to say it, but it's true. This movie had so much potential, but it fell flat from the word go. The story dragged on for what seemed like a lifetime, and Ang Lee's comic-style editing became annoying after the first few minutes. The highpoint of the movie is, of course, the Hulk. If you are blessed with a DVD player, simply skip over the parts that don't include a CGI graphic, and you'll have a good time. Eric Bana didn't win me over as Bruce Banner, and as much …
review by . June 17, 2003
posted in Movie Hype
Pros: Not Much     Cons: Bad acting, boring script, dull action.     The Bottom Line: A bloated excess of a film that is not only a waste of the fine talent, but a dull waste of time.     Raging inside Dr Bruce Banner (Eric Bana) is a monster waiting to be unleashed. Anyone familiar with the comic book or the TV series that starred the late Bill Bixby will be familiar with the setup of “Hulk” the new film version of the classic …
About the reviewer

Ranked #7
I basically am just a normal person obbsessed with Mixed Martial Arts, pro wrestling, movies of all kinds, music of all kinds, books of all kinds, and of course foods of all kinds. Just trying to keep … more
Consider the Source

Use Trust Points to see how much you can rely on this review.

You
FM_ALEX
Your ratings:
rate more to improve this
About this movie

Wiki

When the Hulk gets angry, his movie gets good, so you wish he'd get angry more often. Accepting this challenge after the triumphantCrouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, director Ang Lee has created an ambitious film, based on the Marvel comic created by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby, that succeeds as a cautionary tale about mad science and traumatized children coping with legacies of pain. That's the Hulk's problem: After accidental exposure to gamma radiation, scientist Bruce Banner (Eric Bana) turns into the huge, green, and indestructible Hulk when provoked, and repressed childhood memories fuel his fury. Hobbled by the obligatory "origin story" (to acquaint neophytes with the character's Jekyll-and-Hyde-ish fate), there's room for little else in a sluggish film that struggles to reconcile Lee's stylistic flair (evident in his visual interpretation of comic-book technique) with the razzle-dazzle of a megabudget franchise. What's good is good (Jennifer Connelly essentially echoes her role fromA Beautiful Mind, and Nick Nolte is righteously tormented as Banner's father), but the movie's schizoid intentions remain largely unclear.--Jeff Shannon
view wiki

Details

Director: Ang Lee
Genre: Action, Adventure
Release Date: 2003
MPAA Rating: PG-13
DVD Release Date: January 11, 2007
Runtime: 138 minutes
Studio: Universal Studios
Polls with this movie
First to Review
© 2014 Lunch.com, LLC All Rights Reserved
Lunch.com - Relevant reviews by real people.
()
This is you!
Ranked #
Last login
Member since
reviews
comments
ratings
questions
compliments
lists