Well, here we are, in possibly the most unique situation in film history: a film that is simultaneously a remake, a sequel, a new adaptation, an adaptation functioning as a sequel, a sequel functioning as a remake, and you could add the word "pseudo" to everything in the paragraph.
'The Incredible Hulk', as it stands, exists because of the film it precedes, Ang Lee's oft-criticized 'Hulk', a film that had the gall to take a comic book hero whose main characteristic is that he smashes things, and give him a backstory and character development, in an attempt to add some depth to the usual action movie histrionics. Unfortunately, he failed miserably, as there is both too much chatter and worse, almost all of it is the same sort of generic, familiar pap that all comic book films have. It wasn't any smarter or more intellectual than the other films of its ilk, it just wanted you to think it was because it treated what most entries use as montages as the main action, and the action scenes as short punctuation in between blocks of text.
Needless to say, the mainstream, people who hate dialogue-heavy films when they DO possess intelligence and depth, hated this pseudo-intellectual, hideously over-directed nonsense, and Marvel realized if they wanted to continue, they were going to have to do a reboot. Unfortunately, when they rebooted, the filmmakers (and presumably their backers) panicked, and overcompensated the other way, removing any and all traces of character development, and merely making it a string of action sequences, with a bland throw-in romance that isn't developed past base. The opening sequence is actually surprisingly well-done, but once they begin to chase him, I felt my attention start to wane, and the film never regained the goodwill I felt for it early.
In the acting department, Edward Norton is certainly a step up from Eric Bana, but he's given much of the same bland platitudes, without much of the overabundance of whining that Bana had to slog through, so really, although Bana's effect on me was certainly negative, it's more to speak of than Norton's effect on me, which was almost wholly negligible, because a good actor can only be a good actor if you actually give him worthwhile material, and it's just not here. Liv Tyler is just as much a useless wet blanket as Jennifer Connelly was half a decade ago, but Jennifer Connelly was far more attractive, so I guess that's a downgrade? Speaking of downgrades, the one person that really was fully-formed, refreshingly realistic and well-acted in 'Hulk' was Sam Elliott as General Ross. It was really neat to see him play someone who wasn't just the usual Military Man who is just constantly yelling to shoot clip after clip after clip into the hero, and it was too bad to see him get stuck in such a lame flick. Well, William Hurt takes over the role here, and sadly, he has been turned into exactly the sort of ineffectual, gung-ho, bullet-abuser that it was refreshing to see Elliott go away from, and he also fades without any impact. In supporting roles, Tim Roth and Tim Blake Nelson are solid in smaller roles, but other than a few choice lines here and there, aren't really given anything to really unleash a character from.
The film's action climax and its extra final scene tie it inseparably with this spring's 'Iron Man', another film that was critically and commercially acclaimed, and underwhelmed me with its laziness and mediocrity. 'Iron Man', though, at least had a charismatic centerpiece character, and although I grew completely tired of his shtick by the end of that film, it was still a positive point to hang its hat on. This film has no such centerpiece, despite the presence of a better actor, and suffers for it.
Also, the fact that that film had the same sort of 'gathering and joining up' final scene means without question that these are all leading up to a movie sometime in the future which may very well be the biggest comic book movie ever made. I can only hope that by then, they took the time to craft realistic, thought-out characters, an original storyline, and yet, still realize that at the end of the day, we'd all like, not just explosions, not just exposition, but a balanced diet of depth AND destruction, and when that happens, you'll have your comic book masterpiece, something that 'The Incredible Hulk' surely ain't.
{Grade: 5/10 (C) / #45 (of 79) of 2008}
'The Incredible Hulk', as it stands, exists because of the film it precedes, Ang Lee's oft-criticized 'Hulk', a film that had the gall to take a comic book hero whose main characteristic is that he smashes things, and give him a backstory and character development, in an attempt to add some depth to the usual action movie histrionics. Unfortunately, he failed miserably, as there is both too much chatter and worse, almost all of it is the same sort of generic, familiar pap that all comic book films have. It wasn't any smarter or more intellectual than the other films of its ilk, it just wanted you to think it was because it treated what most entries use as montages as the main action, and the action scenes as short punctuation in between blocks of text.
Needless to say, the mainstream, people who hate dialogue-heavy films when they DO possess intelligence and depth, hated this pseudo-intellectual, hideously over-directed nonsense, and Marvel realized if they wanted to continue, they were going to have to do a reboot. Unfortunately, when they rebooted, the filmmakers (and presumably their backers) panicked, and overcompensated the other way, removing any and all traces of character development, and merely making it a string of action sequences, with a bland throw-in romance that isn't developed past base. The opening sequence is actually surprisingly well-done, but once they begin to chase him, I felt my attention start to wane, and the film never regained the goodwill I felt for it early.
In the acting department, Edward Norton is certainly a step up from Eric Bana, but he's given much of the same bland platitudes, without much of the overabundance of whining that Bana had to slog through, so really, although Bana's effect on me was certainly negative, it's more to speak of than Norton's effect on me, which was almost wholly negligible, because a good actor can only be a good actor if you actually give him worthwhile material, and it's just not here. Liv Tyler is just as much a useless wet blanket as Jennifer Connelly was half a decade ago, but Jennifer Connelly was far more attractive, so I guess that's a downgrade? Speaking of downgrades, the one person that really was fully-formed, refreshingly realistic and well-acted in 'Hulk' was Sam Elliott as General Ross. It was really neat to see him play someone who wasn't just the usual Military Man who is just constantly yelling to shoot clip after clip after clip into the hero, and it was too bad to see him get stuck in such a lame flick. Well, William Hurt takes over the role here, and sadly, he has been turned into exactly the sort of ineffectual, gung-ho, bullet-abuser that it was refreshing to see Elliott go away from, and he also fades without any impact. In supporting roles, Tim Roth and Tim Blake Nelson are solid in smaller roles, but other than a few choice lines here and there, aren't really given anything to really unleash a character from.
The film's action climax and its extra final scene tie it inseparably with this spring's 'Iron Man', another film that was critically and commercially acclaimed, and underwhelmed me with its laziness and mediocrity. 'Iron Man', though, at least had a charismatic centerpiece character, and although I grew completely tired of his shtick by the end of that film, it was still a positive point to hang its hat on. This film has no such centerpiece, despite the presence of a better actor, and suffers for it.
Also, the fact that that film had the same sort of 'gathering and joining up' final scene means without question that these are all leading up to a movie sometime in the future which may very well be the biggest comic book movie ever made. I can only hope that by then, they took the time to craft realistic, thought-out characters, an original storyline, and yet, still realize that at the end of the day, we'd all like, not just explosions, not just exposition, but a balanced diet of depth AND destruction, and when that happens, you'll have your comic book masterpiece, something that 'The Incredible Hulk' surely ain't.
{Grade: 5/10 (C) / #45 (of 79) of 2008}