The Incredible Hulk (2008) User Reviews

An underrated part of MCU history

[Oeuvre_Klika · 8/10 · 8 May 2019]

As I am writing this review, Avengers: Endgame is breaking box-office records as the culmination of 11 years of the MCU. Marvel Studios has become a juggernaut that seemingly nothing can ever stop. When The Incredible Hulk came out in 2008, the second movie of the so-called « Phase 1 » after Iron Man, such a success was merely a hope, if it was envisaged at all.

However, this movie is an oddity in the MCU. It isn't considered an essential watch, a lot of people just forget about it, or simply have never seen it. And this isn't very suprising, as The Incredible Hulk has a completely different feel as any other MCU movie. There are no vibrant colors, jokes are few and far between, and, supreme heresy, it doesn't even feature the beloved Mark Ruffalo as Bruce Banner / the Hulk. Despite that, I think this movie should be more recognized by Marvel enthusiasts.

For one, I was surprised at the number of foreshadowing in it. Despite its reputation, it is very clear, watching now, that it was definitely intended as the beginning of a cinematic universe. There are references to Stark Industries, to super soldiers, to S.H.I.E.L.D., and the movie clearly lays the ground for a sequel (that never happened and probably never will).

The performances were strong, and I will single out Edward Norton, who left the Marvel boat after this, for reasons still a bit unclear. Watching this movie made me regret that he didn't stay in the role for more movies (no disrespect to Mr. Ruffalo whom I like a lot, as does everyone). I am a big fan of Edward Norton in general, from whom I have never seen an unenjoyable performance. That stays true for this movie. To me, his casting as Bruce Banner was an inspired one. He portrayed the tortured soul of the character exactly as I envision it, and with a lot of nuances.

The story itself isn't very remarkable. It's fairly conventional, although maybe not totally conventional for a superhero movie. I would say it's more of a thriller, about a man on the run from the military who are after his secrets and his life. We've seen this story before, but here the man also happens to turn into a big, green monster when his pulse gets too high. It isn't just a thriller, though, bu also very much a love story, which may be one of the reasons of its unpopularity (?). If that's the case, then it's a shame, because I found the love story actually well done. There was a real chemistry between Edward Norton and Liv Tyler, who portrayed a sweet, but capable Betty Ross, and there wasn't a moment where I didn't believe that these two characters were completely in love.

What this movie might be criticized for, is a lack of the titular Hulk. It's true that it's mainly Banner's story. However, the scenes in which the Hulk appears are very satisfying. I must say I was impressed by the CGI. It isn't as modern as what we're used to see nowadays, but still very good. In a movie with such a realistic feel, it's even more difficult to make a huge CGI monster look like it's really there in the scene, but I though that it worked perfectly.

This movie definitely is the odd one out in regards to the whole MCU, but I think it deserves not to be forgotten or dismissed. Not only is its quality on par with other, more popular Marvel movies, it is also our only Hulk solo movie, and it will stay so for the foreseeable future, due to the distribution deal between Marvel and Universal. So, if you're taking a nostalgia trip through the history of the MCU, or if you're only just now starting to delve into this cinematic universe, don't skip the Incredible Hulk.

An MCU film that deserved better at the box office

[gavin-thelordofthefu-48-460297 · 8/10 · 2 May 2020]

The Incredible Hulk, based on another marvel superhero and also the 1970s TV show, revolves around Bruce Banner becoming a fugitive after his science experiment exposes gamma radiation on him which transforms him into the Hulk which becomes his appearance for brief periods of time. Meanwhile, General Ross and his army including Emil Blonsky tracks down Bruce and little does he know that Emil decides to use a serum that would give him some abilities while also transforming him into an even worse creature imaginable.

Out of all the MCU films I've seen, the one that didn't make as much money compared to the others is this. Which is a shame because this is directed by Louis Leterrier, who would later direct the terrible Clash of the Titans remake, Now You See Me, and the recent TV show The Dark Crystal: Age of Resistance (which I severely liked). And the acting from everyone involved is good. Edward Norton does a great job as Bruce Banner, Liv Tyler from The Lord of the Rings trilogy does a good job too as Betty as did William Hurt and Tim Roth and Tim Blake Nelson. Sure, the villain could've been developed more and the second act of the film could've been better, but everything else is done very well. The cinematography is gorgeous, the pacing is decent, the editing is superb, the music from Craig Armstrong is rousing, and the action sequences are solid.

So, overall, this isn't a perfect film by any means but it's way better than the 2003 version (which isn't terrible but could've been much better). To those who have seen most of the MCU films or not, certainly give this one a go. :)

A fun summer blockbuster

[MovieAddict2016 · 7/10 · 15 June 2008]

In 2003, Ang Lee's Hulk was released to commercial success – breaking box office records for a June opening and smashing its way to the top of the box office, it outperformed many analysts' expectations and was well on its way to becoming one of the biggest comic book films ever produced.

Then, of course, the negative word of mouth caught up with it – and by the following weekend it had dropped a colossal 60%. It was quickly left floundering in theaters and only turned a profit thanks to worldwide intake.

Marvel wasn't quite sure what to do – the film's huge opening indicated an inherent interest in the material, but fans obviously didn't enjoy what they were seeing.

Ang Lee's film was, to be fair, admirable in its scope and ambitions – it wasn't your typical comic book action film. But, at the end of the day, most audiences don't want two-and-a-half hour psychological explorations when they go to see a Hulk movie – they want big battle scenes and lots of bruising action, both of which the 2003 Hulk – for the most part – failed to deliver.

I count myself among the masses that disliked the 2003 film – not because I was a fan of the comics and not because I was disappointed in its treatment of the material; not even because I thought it was boring, necessarily. I simply thought in spite of its aim to be an intelligent movie, it was quite silly and pretentious – the end fight sequence was appalling, for example. It was a film containing moments of genius cornered by lots of unnecessary scenes and scenery chewing by Nick Nolte.

So, with this in mind, the ultimate question is: does the 2008 Hulk deliver on its promise to be bigger, bolder and better? Well, in short, yes – it's still not a great film by any means, and it has its fair share of flaws (most notably the last twenty minutes which, despite a cool battle sequence, go overboard in their destruction), but at the end of the day, it's an entertaining summer blockbuster with a cast that's probably a little better than it deserves.

Edward Norton would have been my last choice as Bruce Banner – not because I think he's bad for the role, but rather because he is such an unexpected choice. Renowned for his anti-mainstream approach to film-making and his artistic credibility, his placement in a comic book franchise sequel/reboot is puzzling to say the least – it would be like Christian Bale taking on a role in a Batman or Terminator movie (oh, wait).

The thing is: Norton delivers a solid performance. I'm not sure if it's better than what Eric Bana tried to achieve (I'd say Bana's performance is a bit more complex overall), but I think that's partly due to the film's length and also because it's so action-packed. For what it's worth, Norton tries his best to inject some humanity into the character; the whole Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde aspect is more prevalent here than in the 2003 film. In that movie, Bana's Banner admitted to enjoying the transformation into the Hulk; in 2008, Norton is struggling to conceal and control it.

William Hurt replaces Sam Elliot as General Ross, the man responsible for Bruce's predicament. The movie is essentially a cat-and-mouse game, with Banner hiding away in Brazil for over a year, until Ross finally discovers his location – prompting Bruce to flee back to North America in a last-ditch effort to find a cure for his "disease." He reunites with Ross' daughter, Betty (Liv Tyler), and finds himself at odds with an overzealous combatant named Blonsky (played by Tim Roth), who eventually transforms into Abomination.

My problems with the film are most present in the latter half. The first 45 minutes is a lot of fun and is rather cleverly made – the fight scenes are engaging and Roth establishes his anti-hero villain. But suddenly halfway through the movie, Blonsky turns into an unmotivated cliché of a bad guy, and by the end of the film you lose all care and understanding for the character. Once he transforms into the Abomination and goes on a citywide rampage in search of an equal foe (in this case, the Hulk), his reasons are puzzling.

This is where the film truly falls apart, because suddenly General Ross is responsible for millions of dollars' worth of damage and civilian casualties (without spoiling any surprises, he is responsible for Blonsky's transformation), and he's flying around in an Army helicopter following the city's destruction, but nobody really seems to care. He never loses his job, even after he tears up a college campus in search of the Hulk earlier in the film. It may be pointless to criticize a comic book film for lapses in logic, but since the film strives for a sense of realism in its early scenes, the switch to excess halfway through is a bit disheartening. The 2003 Hulk had the same problems, incidentally – I'm wondering if it's a flaw of the comic book or just the character itself; perhaps it's too hard to retain realism when you've got a 12-foot giant green dude destroying everything in sight.

If I'm being too critical, it's only because I enjoyed the film and regretted these aspects. At the end of the day, it's a fun, entertaining summer blockbuster -- and that's really all it needed to be.

Simpler but more entertaining movie

[abecip · 7/10 · 16 June 2008]

First off, let's get one thing straight - - - this movie is NOT a sequel to the 2003 Hulk which had attempts to portray many things from the Hulk comics (father-son conflict, father-daughter strained relationship, a love triangle of sorts) that resulted in a confusing, sometimes scary (remember that scene where The Hulk was fighting off killer dogs?) movie.

This Incredible Hulk version is a simpler story; however, with strong performances by Edward Norton, William Hurt and Liv Tyler, it entertains (yes the key word is that it ENTERTAINS) better than its predecessor.

While it retains a more serious tone generally than, say Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk is definitely not a pushover when it comes to getting fans to enjoy a good movie. The action sequences, though not that many, were pretty good. Whatever lacking in action you think it has in the beginning, the climax between the Hulk and Abomination (you've seen that in the trailer so no spoiler there) should more than make up for it. It doesn't have many light moments (I only count about 3, really, cause they were quite few so I remembered them), but it wasn't as totally dark as the Ang Lee version.

And to some extent, at least this Hulk is less CGI/cartoony-looking than the last one. While he does have those weird ridges/lines stretching across his body, making the muscles seem different than what you'd see on a big body builder, this Hulk is more realistic (but really, how realistic can you get with a CGI-made anti-hero?), so you at least have an improvement there.

Edward Norton is more believable as the "tragic-story-of-my-life" protagonist Bruce Banner (no offense to Eric Bana, but he was just too muscular and less flawed-looking that Norton). The one actor I miss here, though, is Jennifer Connelly as Betty Ross. While Liv Tyler's portrayal was credible enough, I don't think anyone can beat Jennifer's take on Ms. Ross.

Overall, I give it a 7 out of 10. Good enough to watch, entertaining and enjoyable without the complexities that the 2003 movie brought to the table, and a worthy addition to cinematic adaptation library that Marvel's adding every year. Hopefully, it will pick up steam after people realize that it's not the complicated, semi-psychological thriller (?) movie that the 2003 Hulk attempted to be. Rather an enjoyable cinematic achievement that's good enough to watch on the big screen.

Not incredible, but rather enjoyable 'Hulk'.

[vip_ebriega · 6/10 · 22 January 2010]

My Take: Flawed but modestly entertaining, and compared to the previous HULK opus, a little better.

Among the others, I was disappointed by Ang Lee's HULK. I have no problem with a more character-driven superhero/comic book movie, but in the expense of deepening the character's persona, it lacks the good ol' comic book action fans have grown to love. Louis Leterrier's reboot/semi-sequel THE INCREDIBLE HULK makes up for that. It's still a flawed experience, with some scenes that still pad out the better bits, but in terms of pure big-screen comic book experience, it's an improvement, albeit not a vast one.

In case you actually liked the Ang Lee version, Leterrier and writers Zak Penn (and Edward Norton, who made an uncredited re-write on his character) doesn't really forget the events of the first movie, but still makes sure everyone else keeps up with a new and different story. Bruce Banner (Edward Norton) is now in hiding, still in search for a cure for his "sickness" with the help of an unseen contributor. Meanwhile, Gen. Ross (William Hurt) is still in search of our monster-transforming fugitive, this time with the help of a bloodthirsty assassin (Tim Roth) who is proves his more than a match for our hero (and we learn later, more than a match for the Hulk as well).

Unlike Lee's artsy version, Leterrier isn't afraid to push through with the action for most of the time, even if his direction of the dramatic scenes are just as slow-moving as Lee's. The still-developing romance between Buce and Betty Ross (Liv Tyler) just doesn't spark. Norton, a fine actor who does a good job in deepening the character, just lacks the charisma of even a doomed comic book character, while Tyler just doesn't add anything to the role. Hurt and Roth actually add some actual depth to the proceedings. While it won't compare to the Iron Men and Dark Knights of the same year, Leterrier does deliver the "Hulk Smash" fans expect, if very little else.

Rating: *** out of 5.

Don't make me hungry...

[YoSafBridge · 7/10 · 16 June 2008]

Three cheers for Marvel for finally realizing that no one knows their material better then themselves. May they never sell another beloved superhero to a lesser being again.

For the second time this summer Marvel has given us a superhero movie that just plain rocks. With the exact right amount of humour, character development and great action sequences, the Incredible Hulk is up there with Iron Man as one of my favourite films to be released so far in the summer movie season. While I didn't like it quite as much as Iron Man (Robert Downey WAS Tony Stark. Whereas something still doesn't sit right about Edward Norton as Bruce...) it was nevertheless a great, faithful adaptation of the comic books. Plus the cameo appearances by both Stan Lee and Robert Downey Jr where terrific! Possibly my favourite Stan Lee cameo yet.

There isn't really much else to say besides, go see it for yourselves. If you're a fan of the comics, or just of fun popcorn films you'll definitely enjoy this one.

8/10

Almost Incredible

[schristian-6 · 10 June 2008]

I attended a sneak preview of The Incredible Hulk last night. Incredible? No, but Very Good. And it washes the bad taste left in my mouth from Indiana Jones and the Big Letdown. The story is good, the acting is awesome. Ed Norton is the perfect person to play the tormented Bruce Banner. He is more believable in the roll than Eric Bana. Liv Tyler is very good as Betty Ross (formally played by the tasty Jennifer Connelly) William Hurt as General Ross is impressive and makes for a worthy adversary to Bruce Banner. If I had to come up with a negative, it would be Tim Roth. While I really like him, and he always plays great villains, I feel he's just miss cast here. He seems tiny next to General Ross. Instead of coming off like the English bad ass special op he's supposed to be, he comes off more like a jerk with Napoleon Syndrome. Someone more physically imposing like Vinnie Jones (Bullet tooth from Snatch), or Daniel Craig (the new Bond) would have been more convincing for the part. But I'm just picking here. The movie is a joy. Great action. No long boring, dragging development stuff that the first Hulk had in spades. There are some very nice cameos as well. Some were a surprise, some were not. I didn't see Nick Fury anywhere except in a brief headline in a montage. However I did not remain through the credits, so there might have been a scene at the end like Iron Man that I don't know about. I give it ***1/2 out of ****. I also predict it to make 80+million this weekend when it opens to the public and should "Hulk Smash" the competition. The movie received an ovation from the audience at the end which sums it up. A worthy movie made for the fans and everyone else.

It is a lot better than the 2003 one

[bretttaylor-04022 · 6/10 · 9 January 2022]

The first issue I have with this is it feels like there is a film missing. Is it a sequel to the Hulk or not, I still don't know. Its just there to introduce the Hulk to the MCU I feel. It is entertaining and never boring but it is far from spectacular.

Attention - Origin Mixture!!!

[Nytwolf · 9/10 · 11 June 2008]

For those that know only of the original comic book Hulk, the TV series Hulk, or the regrettable Ang Lee Hulk, you should know that this new version is a mixture of origins.

Without spoiling it, one of the larger ingredients in this new Hulk comes from a Marvel series that is an alternate universe. There are many differences in the Ultimates Universe. In this version, Banner did not get his gamma radiation from exposure during an experimental bomb explosion. I won't spoil it, but you can go to www.marvel.com and look under "Ultimates" if you wish to get the gist of it.

I can truly say that this version captures a little of everything, so that no matter what your knowledge is of the Hulk character, there's tie-ins to everything.

Personally, I felt this reboot was well thought out. It allows for any future connectivity by not limiting it to one version of the Hulk. This will allow future Marvel movie-makers the ability to pick and choose aspects from the multitude of alternate universes, re-tellings, and time spans to combine whatever they please.

This was well cast. When the overall product can make me forget the fact that I don't like a specific actor, and truly appreciate the total entertainment experience, it's something to smile about. I won't mention which one I don't care for, since all that will do is spark useless debate.

Story - intricate and intelligent, fast-paced, yet deeply explanatory, complex, yet easily taken in by non-geeks. Enough references to the true comic, alternate comic, and TV show, that everyone in the sneak peek seemed to be pleased. I surely was.

CGI was great. Don't know why some have to nit-pick, but you can't please everyone, I guess. Action was wonderful with plenty of it! If you've ever read one of my reviews, you'll know that I'm a true fan of overall entertainment. While I have favorites, I don't base reviews on just one actor, writer, director, production company, genre, or whatever. So, if you don't like my opinion, so be it.

Hulk smash-hit!

[come2whereimfrom · 7/10 · 26 June 2008]

From that brilliant poster of Ed Norton dressed all in denim walking away from the huge frame of his alter ego the Hulk to the superb end fight that shows the makers of Spiderman 3 how it should be done this is a great film. Not by any means a brilliant film but a truly enjoyable superhero romp none the less. Gone is the emotion that Ang Lee tried to inject into Hulk (2003) and back is the smashing and shouting and smashing. Plagued by his demons and his uncontrollable green counterpart, Norton plays Dr. Bruce Banner a scientist with a secret, desperate to find a cure. Hot on his heels are the army lead by Emil Blonsky (Roth) under the command of General Thaddeus 'Thunderbolt' Ross, who just so happens to be the dad of Banners girlfriend Betty (Tyler), who wants to know how he gets all angry and use the technology to create 'super soldiers'. Plus Iron Man Tony Stark is in it. That then is about it, what you get is a chase movie with some great characters, some great effects and a couple of amazing set pieces including the end fight between the Hulk and the Abomination. All in all it's smashing stuff that should leave other superhero films green with envy.

At least it's not as bad as the Ang Lee version

[cherold · 5/10 · 12 September 2012]

With only the vaguest whiff of a story and a lack of character development even in Bruce Banner, the sort of tortured conflicted comic book character seemingly custom-made for character development, The Incredible Hulk really only has its special effects going for it. And while those are decent, a movie that is nothing but its special effects is not a movie.

Ed Norton doesn't really do much with the role. Yes, I know Ed Norton is a brilliant actor prone to giving amazing performances, but he just doesn't do that here; Mark Rufallo's laconic Bruce Banner in the Avengers is far more interesting than Norton's here.

Frankly, I was just bored. Not so bored that I stopped watching, but consistently restless and never drawn in.

A whole lot better than you think

[Rxblinkboy · 8/10 · 8 June 2008]

Honestly, as soon as I heard they were making another Hulk movie I was surprised. When I heard they had cast Ed Norton, I was shocked. So going into this movie I had no idea what to expect. Coming out, I feel like an idiot because it was really masterfully done. Lettier does an amazing job, Norton was fantastic, and as far as a comic book movie goes, this one is just about on top with little nods and mentions. If you don't walk out of this film screaming HELLL YEAAAA, then you are not normal. Far better than Ang Lee's attempt at the green man and as far as this year, it's definitely Marvel's year. No better way to make up for Spiderman 3 than releasing Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk just a month apart. Thank you Marvel for cleaning the mess Spiderman 3 left and clearing your name. This film just makes me thing of one word...AVENGERS

Far superior MCU movie than others

[john-demetriou-jd · 7/10 · 24 July 2018]

This MCU movie is far superior than later ones. The story is good, the action is good, the cgi is good. I consider it far betrer than Iron man 2 and 3, the whole Thor trilogy and Avengers 2. The difference between this movie and better ones is that it does not have a forced joke every minute and a half like later ones. The reason that it has lower average rating is also because back then no Marvel fanboys existed. It is reviewed by pure movie and comic book fans. The other movies I mentioned were people getting on the MARVEL CAN DO NO WRONG bandwagon amd just rilled until today. Marvel is doing good, but this one deserves much more respect and recognition. Also, Edward Norton is a better Banner than Rufallo. Sorry Mark

Hulk Bore! Again!

[Critomaton · 1/10 · 13 July 2008]

Somebody owes Ang Lee an apology. Actually, a lot of people do. And I'll start. I was never interested in the Ang Lee film Hulk, because of the near unanimous bad reviews. Even the premium cable channels seemed to rarely show it. I finally decided to watch it yesterday on USA network and, wow....

SPOILERS FOR ANG LEE'S HULK AND THE INCREDIBLE HULK

Was it boring! I almost didn't make it through Ang Lee's Hulk. Eric Bana was expressionless, Nick Nolte was horrible, Sam Elliott was unlikeable (and that's no fun, he's usually a cool character). In fact, I honestly think they chose Eric Bana because his non-descript face was the easiest to mimic with computer graphics - and it was clear that the Ang Lee Hulk was meant to facially resemble Bruce Banner in his non-angry state. When Hulk fought a mutant poodle I was ready to concede Hulk as the worst superhero movie ever.

But then something happened. About 3/4 of the way through this tedious movie, there was a genuinely exciting and - dare I say it - reasonably convincing - extended action scene that starts with Hulk breaking out of a containment chamber in a military base, fighting M1 tanks and Comanche helicopters in the desert, then riding an F22 Raptor into the stratosphere, only to be captured on the streets of San Francisco. This was one of the best action sequences ever made for a superhero movie. And I have to say, the CGI was quite good. That's not to say that the Hulk was totally convincing. But it didn't require much more suspension of disbelief than is required in a lot of non-superhero action movies. And that's quite a feat.

Of course, the ending got really stupid with Bruce Banner's father turning into some sort of shape-shifting villain but the earlier long action sequence put any of Iron Man's brief heroics to shame. And overall, apart from the animated mutant dogs, it really did seem like the CGI in Hulk tried hard to convince you that he was real and really interacting with his environment. It was certainly better than I expected.

OK, but what about The Incredible Hulk? Guess what... It's boring too! It has just a few appearances by the Hulk and here's the thing - the CGI in this movie is horrible. Maybe the Hulk in Ang Lee's version looked fake at times and cartoonish at others - but it had its convincing moments also. The Incredible Hulk looked positively ridiculous. It had skin tone and muscle tone that didn't even look like a living creature, just some sort of computer-generated texture. It was really preposterous. The lighting, environment and facial effects didn't look 5 years newer than Ang Lee's, they looked 10 years older. And there really is no excuse for that. We truly are living in an era where computer programmers can ruin a movie just as thoroughly as any director, actor or cinematographer ever could.

Worse, the writer and director of this movie seemed to learn almost nothing from Ang Lee's "failure". All the same mistakes are made. Bruce Banner is practically emotionless. The general is so relentlessly, implausibly one-dimensional that he seems faker than the Hulk. The love interest is unconvincing (I have to give Liv Tyler credit for being more emotional than Jennifer Connelly, though both are quite easy on the eyes). Tim Blake Nelson overacts almost as much as Nick Nolte, even though he's only in the movie for a few minutes. The Hulk really doesn't do much in this movie, certainly not any more than in Ang Lee's version. The Incredible Hulk was slightly more fast-paced, but since nothing really happened anyway that's not worth much. Oh yeah, the villain is every bit as phony looking as the Hulk. He's actually much more interesting as a human than as a monster.

This is how I can definitively say Ang Lee's version was better: if I ever have the chance to see Ang Lee's version again, I might be able to sit through it to see the good action sequences, or else to try to appreciate the dialogue a little more (more likely I'd just fast forward to the good parts). But there is absolutely not a single scene in The Incredible Hulk that is worth seeing once, let alone twice. It is truly at the bottom of the heap of superhero movies. The cartoonish CGI is an insult to the audience - at least in Ang Lee's version it seems like they were trying to make it realistic (except for the giant poodle, of course).

It is absolutely mind-boggling how the filmmakers intended to erase the bad feelings associated with Ang Lee's Hulk by making almost exactly the same movie.

It is to Edward Norton's credit that he seems to be distancing himself from this film.

Truly Incredible... extraordinary in every way!

[StarkTech · 8 June 2008]

What a summer Marvel is having! Iron Man hitting big was great but Incredible Hulk may even top it. I caught a pre-screening and I can assure everyone that the Hulk delivers more action and maybe more fun. If you are concerned that this film is another Ang Lee type misfire, don't be. It's about 100 times better then the version of five years ago. Unlike the Ang Lee effort, it's presented in a way that can be savored. The pacing is perfect and the action is relentlessly awesome. What's amazing is that they managed to play both sides perfectly. It's far deeper then I would've thought given the subject matter. Each frame is packed with action, emotion, drama or intensity. I was expecting to see a crazy green giant destroying the landscape and fighting another crazy green monster for two hours. I was shocked at the complexity of this movie. Given Edward Norton's involvement, I don't know why I'm so surprised. The action is certainly there but the tone is perfect, a mix of the TV flavor with all the action from the comic books. Hulk does indeed "smash" but it's more then just dumb action with no plot. It truly is an all around exceptional film. Also, I'm amazed at how far the CGI came since the first teaser trailer. This remarkable CGI works very well and it offers the chance to savor a complete movie going experience without being pulled out of the film. This trimmed downed Hulk looks perfect and his opponent is truly frightening. The final battle between the two will go down in movie history as one of the greatest fights of all-time. Overall, a summer movie that's superior to everything else that I've seen this year, with the possible exception of Iron Man. Again, who would've thought that Marvel would be a perfect two for two this summer?

Speaking of Iron Man… (*Beware SPOILER*)

Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) does indeed show up at the end of the film(they cut from Banner and that green eyed smile we've all seen in the TV ads right to the Stark scene and the hairs on your neck will stand up)

Forget there even was a 2003 rendition of the Hulk.

[WyteWolf · 7/10 · 10 June 2008]

While the storyline is predictable, I suspect that this flick (along with Iron Man) ushers in a new era of sorts for Marvel-based movies. While not as slick & witty as Iron Man, let's face it, the Hulk is not nearly as complex a character.

I thought for a moment that perhaps this was the kind of flick I might dial up another friend to watch but I decided to take my wife which turned out to be a bonus for the both of us... I lucked out that I just so happened to take her to a movie that featured Portuguese (EN sub-titles on & off for about 10 minutes or so) but as it turns out she claimed to like it more than Iron Man (which I admit, I might have been a bit more partial to).

Basic plot, good acting (on Norton's part), great special effects, and while I may have been more partial to Iron Man, the battles featured here cannot be compared.

Keep 'em coming Marvel - great job!!

Almost A Monstrous Letdown...

[asaar · 6/10 · 15 June 2008]

So this movie wasn't THAT bad I guess. It was definitely entertaining, a bit better than Ang Lee's 2003 Hulk. There were many things that really bugged me about this one though. First off it is full of advertisements. They threw in a Norton Anti-Virus ad (maybe provoked by Edward Norton's lead role.) Also, Liv Tyler's character decided to buy a rather expensive looking camera after she sold her diamond studded pendant which did not add to the plot at all. Liv Tyler and Edward Norton also do a pitiful job of acting. The two of them had no chemistry. It was like the director threw them on the set without any previous interaction and said "Act!" Despite these harmful casting issues and the unfortunate amount of advertising going on, this was a fun summer movie.

Good if you like the Michael Bay breed of film

[DarthVoorhees · 6/10 · 13 June 2008]

The Incredible Hulk is a tough character to adapt and I really think any filmmaker would have trouble making a good film version of the green guy. When a comic book film is adapted to the big screen the movie goer wants a story to balance the action and in this movie we have no story. The entire film is a special effects extravaganza wrapped in between pieces of bad dialouge and characterization. Creating an effective Bruce Banner is key to making any Hulk adaptation work and it hasn't been done yet. The original Incredible Hulk series that is beloved by so many plays like a melodramatic continuation of Adam West's Batman series, and Ang Lee's Hulk, which I feel is still the best adaptation of the story, tried to add too much dramatic substance.

Norton structures the story as a fugitive film where the Hulk is constantly on the run from Ross and his endless search. Ross enlists the help of Emil Blonsky, a skilled agent from the British Marines to help him find the Hulk. Blonsky eventually becomes a super villain which leads to one of the most painfully fake looking CGI battles ever seen.

The main problem with this film is it's script but the acting isn't good enough to salvage it. Edward Norton doesn't really give me a reason to pity him or feel bad about his condition. Sure he says he is haunted by the prospect of the Hulk hurting people but I didn't get any sense of those emotions in Norton's performance. I don't know what went on because Norton is a very talented actor. I sense he tried to underplay this role. On the other hand William Hurt looks like he wanted to overplay the role and he gives the worst performance of his career as General Thunderbolt Ross. I honestly thought he looked silly in the Ross wardrobe and make-up. Hurt overplays this role and his performance is silly. Liv Tyler is a beauty but her methods of soothing the CGI beast look forced and unreal.

Tim Roth is the exception, he is terrific as the villainous Blonsky. He gets too little screen time in my opinion because the way the super soldier injections drive him mad could have made him a more effective villain if he were given more screen time. Roth is underrated actor and he uses the most of his screen time. His dialogue is bad too but he has terrific presence with it. When he bulks up himself the build-up is disappointingly taken away by bad effects and terrible video game dialogue but the performance is still very good.

The action scenes are somewhat interesting and they are well imagined but I just felt that they could have done more with the human aspects of the character or at least have him battle more than just the military.

The Incredible Hulk ends the same way it began, Bruce Banner is on the run and I am still waiting Hollywood to produce a decent adaptation of this character

It's a good year for superhero movies

[Grant_Price · 7/10 · 15 June 2008]

Out of the five original Avengers, I always thought that the Incredible Hulk was the least interesting and therefore least likely character to be adapted to film (except Ant-Man, although he'll be arriving in 2010...look forward to that.) However, here we sit in 2008 with not just one, but TWO different portrayals of the less-than-jolly green giant. The main problem that the new film faces is that some people will believe it to be a sequel to Ang Lee's 2003 effort, which upon release was blindfolded, made to stand against a wall and executed by public firing squad. The fact is that it is not a sequel at all. Instead, director Louis Leterrier has pulled a 'Batman Begins' and rebooted the franchise, and not just in name only. Everything about the 'Hulk is excellent. From the special effects to the characters to the reticent nods to other superheroes within the Marvel universe, the 'Hulk succeeds on every level.

The film sidesteps the curse of the tedious 'origin story' by showing it to the audience in the opening credits. That should really be a law within superhero movies. It works so well: Bruce Banner works on a radioactive serum with love interest/scientist Betty Ross (played by Liv Tyler's lips), he injects himself to see if it works, it transforms him into the Hulk. There, that didn't need to take one hundred minutes of screen time did it? This means that director Leterrier has free reign to explore how Bruce Banner lives as the Hulk and the attempts by the United States army to track him down and neutralise him, which leads to several action set pieces involving vehicles being thrown into walls and soldiers firing a nimiety of bullets at the Hulk, even when they can clearly see them bouncing off his body. Really, what is the best they are hoping for in a situation like that? "Keep firing, he might develop a vague sense of moral ill-being and stop!" Ultimately, the film boils down to a brawl in New York City between the Hulk and his evil counterpart, a special-ops soldier (Tim Roth being exemplary as usual) willingly injected with the Hulk genes, much like the climax to 'Iron Man.' The difference here is that the build up to this fight doesn't seem rushed like in 'Iron Man' because Leterrier has been able to utilise the whole of the film's running time to arrive at this natural conclusion, instead of being preoccupied with the origin story and tagging on an antagonist at the end.

Whoever cast Edward Norton as Dr Bruce Banner is almost as much of a genius as the person who asked Robert Downey Jr. To play Tony Stark in 'Iron Man' (who makes an appearance in the film inducing fan-boy erections everywhere.) Norton plays his role with understated finesse, never resorting to overly pained facial expressions, intense eye contact or shouting to display the anguish which is consuming him for the majority of the film. He simply shows that the Hulk sized burden on his back is destroying him, crushing his will to live. He looks haunted and tired, but possesses a steely resolve not to succumb to the beast within, although it would temporarily end his struggle if he did so. He's so good that Christian Bale will have to turn water into wine in The Dark Knight to retain his title as King of the Superheroes (Tobey Maguire? Hahaha, you're kidding...wait, you aren't?) There are many minor elements in 'The Incredible Hulk' that elevates it above most movies in this genre. For example, for nearly half of the film the audience are only provided with fleeting glimpses of the Hulk, much like Batman in 'Begins. His presence is not overused, though it easily could be with the bravura CGI shown at the end. Indeed, the first chase scene does not involve Banner turning into the Hulk at all, it is just an exciting pursuit across rooftops in Rio De Janeiro. Also, the orchestral score lends an air of intelligence to the film and enhances the scenes much more than an overdriven guitar track (hello, Iron Man) would have done.

The Incredible Hulk is one of those minority superhero films; it's good. In fact, with regard to any competition it faces, you (if you were looking to conclude a film review with a dialogue related pun) might be inclined to say "Hulk smash!"

unnesscary hate

[ThunderKing6 · 9/10 · 20 February 2019]

Another movie hated by spoiled, weird fans and people.

what's not to like?

Despite a ton of smashing, this film actually was a tad dull...but watchable.

[planktonrules · 6/10 · 24 July 2010]

Before getting into the film, I should probably point out that I am not the best reviewer for this film--unless, like me, you aren't all that familiar with the Hulk. Apart from seeing the pilot of the TV series and riding on the Hulk ride at Universal's theme park, The Island's of Adventure, I have never seen anything of the green guy--not a single comic book nor the previous movie from 2003. So, for the die-hard Hulkophile, I am certainly not the best person to review the film. In fact, I only have watched super hero films because I have a friend and daughter who push me to give them a try. And, in general, I have enjoyed them...but I am still not a big fan.

This film is a sequel (of sorts) and it's obvious from the beginning that the film has come after a lot of things have occurred. Bruce Banner is already the Hulk and how that all came to be was explored in the first film...or at least that's what I've been told. Oddly, he's in Brazil and perhaps he chose this nation because of their spiffy green flag. After a short time, the evil general (William Hurt) and his minions pounce on Banner and try to kidnap him. Not unexpectedly, Banner becomes Hulk and kicks butt. Later, they try the same thing repeatedly, but this time they give Tim Roth (why is an English guy playing a guy in the US Army, by the way--he certainly was no Rambo!) a series of injections to make him a super-soldier--and giving him a chance to defeat the Hulk. The only trouble is--who is going to control this new insanely dangerous nemesis.

Despite my being a relative Hulk newbie, I was surprised that my opinion AND the opinion of both my daughters (including the comic book geek one) was pretty much the same. The film had some nice action but not a whole lot else. As for the rest of the film, it was a tad dull and the relationship with the girl really seemed to slow down the film. As a result, the film is a time-passer and not a whole lot more. I sure hope that the folks at Marvel think twice about all their many, many announced upcoming films. If you keep making mediocre super-hero films, you might just end up killing the genre. This is NOT a film of the same quality as "Iron Man" or "The Dark Knight" (yes, Marvel fans, I know this is a DC franchise--back off, nerd-boys!!!).

Folly Green Giant

[guringo · 1/10 · 17 September 2008]

For all the CG brute force on display, this is one lame flop-along of a flic. The same constructs we've seen in dozens if not hundreds of other movies are rehashed, and why? Because what can you really do with a raging bullfrog on steroids? A second, even bigger, bullfrog? A Dr.Jekyll & Mr.Hyde meets Beauty & the Beast in stretchy pants? The thinking man's King Kong on a self-help quest? They just can't help but fall back on the same clichés and feeble structure with good ol' time-warps to fast-track to the climatic fight scene -and prep it up for the sequel before rolling the credits. Depravity is when you have a super-bezerking giant on a havoc-spree toned down to pg-13. One-liners as motives for us to swallow; "You don't deserve the power!" and so much homage-fromage as filler, it's downright cannibalistic.

Cheesy hilights...

Two-dimensional bad-ass co-workers, what would heroes do without them? The babe they harass comes across as a cowering doe, nothing wrong with that I guess...

Overnight the Hulk runs from Rio to Guatemala, that's more or less from New York to Alaska. But he panhandles/walks the rest of the way home...

General-Colonel-whatever, answers to no one, heads his own shop for years on end, runs a military op in Brazil, on university grounds, NYC, no inquiries, no hell to pay, nada...

'Stanley' (clever, eh) the pizza-place... every home-coming-hero-on-the-run has one, older guy with a spare room upstairs, money to lend, keeps a tab on everyone- Banner; Is she seeing someone..? Stanley; "He's a head-shrink. They say he's one of the best(sic).. but a really nice guy..." (thank-you, Stanley..)

Bribing a security guard with a free pizza to not catch hell for a non-delivery on a pizza? Bribing another guy in the computer lab with second pizza..? How gullible and gluttonous and famished and broke must regular folks be made out to be...?

Betty's tag-along setup - "Well, at least let me walk you to the station."

Swallowing the disk-on-key before turning into the Hulk, how would Banner know the Hulk's stomach juices wouldn't dissolve or at least ruin it?

Of course the Hulk can't outright kill any foot-soldier, his rage is against machinery, movie-taboo exception would be anyone within contraption such as the helicopter crew...

Pawning a necklace to buy a second-hand pickup and pay for gas, they abandon the wheels because of roadblocks into NYC and then pay off some other guy to ferry them across... and then pay some maniac cab-driver for another, mindless, hi-speed sequence...

Abomination swatting all them blind pedestrians- blind because they're impervious to his standing there, his motive; looking for a real fight... soldiers trying latest shoulder-missiles, they don't work so they drive in reverse till they bump into pile-up, cab driver (must be that same maniac) drives right into 12' monster, fear-stricken soldiers stay in place while Abomination goes 'give me a real fight' before slamming cab into them...

The helicopter crash-lands into the church ruins, but try as they might to get out, an unconscious/dead soldier is propped in the only opening so that Betty exasperates in her struggle to escape as the fuselage catches fire (only for Hulk to hand-clap it out)...

For all the violence they inflict one on the other, and for all their super-strengths, it's an indestructible chain that allows the Hulk to subdue Abomination. And it's Betty that stops the Hulk from killing him, he's vanquished, right, so just let him be...they'll super-handcuff his ass to a super-cell till the sequel...

Every such finale must entail a crowd, no matter how preposterous for people to show up.

Hulk departs a la Spidey minus cobwebs...

aaga-gaga-gaga...

Grading on a Bell Curve

[A_Different_Drummer · 10/10 · 20 February 2016]

About 1100 reviews on the old IMDb and I am going to do something I have never done before -- review on a bell curve.

Seriously, before you start listing all the things you DIDN'T like, ask yourself how many live action Hulk movies have there been outside of the Avenger ensemble acts? Answer: Two. Only two. Just two.

And the entry from Ang Lee was so wretched, so horrific, that this one gets a push up the curve.

It is actually a solid film. Roth makes a great villain. Tyler was a great love interest. (The scene where Hulk becomes a giant fire extinguisher is one for the record books and memorable). And Norton is arguably the highest-level A-lister to ever play the role.

(Or, also arguably, to ever play it again -- notice he was gone from the Avenger movies. Also notice that the two solo-Hulk movies did so poorly at the box office that this one actually ends with a promo for the coming Avengers, suggesting that the suits at Marvel are no longer interested in gambling on Hulk in a film by himself and all your future Hulk movies may be of the animated variety).

All done, this is a much better film than the reviews would suggest.

Great and Entertaining Adventure

[claudio_carvalho · 7/10 · 15 November 2008]

Dr. Bruce Banner (Edward Norton) is secretly living in the greatest slum of South America, the Favela da Rocinha, and working in a factory of "cachaça" in Rio de Janeiro. While seeking the cure with his beloved Dr. Elizabeth Ross (Liv Tyler) and other scientists, he learns how to control his emotions and heart beat and to keep his human form for a long period. When General Thaddeus 'Thunderbolt' Ross (William Hurt) finds a clue of his location in Brazil, he sends a command leaded by the tough Major Emil Blonsky (Tim Roth) to abduct Dr. Banner. However, he transforms in Hulk and escapes to Guatemala. Later he contacts Betty and his colleagues and when he is close to find his cure, Blonsky captures him and transforms himself in powerful beast The Abomination. Dr. Banner has to decide whether he should remain human or transform in The Incredible Hulk again to stop The Abomination.

After the "Shrek-Hulk" of Ang "Brokeback Mountain" Lee, "The Incredible Hulk" is a wonderful surprise. The story and characters recall the comic books of my childhood, plenty of action and adventure. For Brazilians and more specifically for "cariocas" (people born in Rio de Janeiro) like me, it is funny to see Dr. Bruce Banner living in Rocinha, probably the most dangerous location in my city, where the police is afraid to go, chased by the American soldiers. In real life, they certainly would be murdered by the army of drug dealers. Further, I really appreciated the effort of Edward Norton speaking a couple of words and sentences in Portuguese. But the most important, the story is a great and entertaining adventure and the special effects are really good. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "O Incrível Hulk" ("The Incredible Hulk")

Questionable Re-Reboot is a Hulk-Sized Leap Backwards

[drqshadow-reviews · 2/10 · 11 September 2011]

There ought to be a law for relaunches of a franchise less than five years after the last attempt: every negative must be destroyed if it winds up being even worse. From start to finish, this was a total mess of a film that seemed more interested in finding room for not-so-subtle cameos and wink-nudge-grins than telling a functional story. Knocking out the Hulk's fabled origin story during the opening credits may have freed up the rest of the picture to explore new territory, but it also killed the basis of the cast's relationships and removed any reason for the audience to care about them. Ed Norton and Liv Tyler turn in genuinely rotten performances, with a black hole of chemistry as an on-screen duo, that are neither true to the original characters nor interesting in the slightest. Bruce Banner never comes off as remotely intelligent, let alone the super genius he'd have to be to come up with the formula that turned him into the Hulk, and actually spends more time running from grossly generic government operatives than using his brains. That effectively kills the intriguing contrast between he and the Hulk that should be fueling the story. Both characters are mindlessly running, just in opposite directions. Corny dialog, predictable twists and turns, weak CG, flat characterization and sleepwalking actors - this blew up in Marvel's face.