Hulk (2003).

Well, The Incredible Hulk is opening in cinemas this weekend - the second attempt to get the comic adapted to the big screen. It’s been pretty positively reviewed, but then again, that’s not hard compared to the previous version - the 2003 Ang Lee movie. That is easily one of the worst-received superhero movie of the past few years. It’s not considered as dreadful as Batman & Robin, but most people think of it as a pretentious, muddled, weird mess of a movie. But is it really?

Let’s take another look at it! Okay, turn the clock back to 2003. Marvel is in the middle of a renaissance period for their movies. After never having been able to get one off the ground for decades, suddenly it seems as if they can do no wrong. Blade starts it off in 1998, followed up by X-Men in 2000. They’re both modest hits, and well-received. Then in 2002, they hit the jackpot! Spider-Man is released and promptly becomes the fifth most successful movie of all time. Blade 2 is also released and greatly improves on the first.

In 2003, Daredevil comes out. It’s pretty mediocre, but it makes a bunch of money. X2 then comes out at the start of the summer, and is hailed as one of the nest superhero movies ever, surpassing the first one easily. So, Marvel have every reason to be happy - they’ve never had a flop, and with the exception of Daredevil, they’ve garnered pretty positive reviews. They feel like they can do no wrong. Hulk doesn’t look like it’s going to end this streak either. It’s directed by Ang Lee, coming off the acclaimed Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. It’s co-written by the writer of the same film. Oscar-winning pedigree attached to a winning streak - can’t go wrong, right?

Oops! Hulk debuts with a record opening weekend, then falls FAST. Audiences abandon the film at record levels, and it barely makes more than its $120m budget. But even more stinging are the reviews. Everyone hates it. The best reviews you can find are those that call it an interesting failure. It’s so bad, that five years later, Marvel acts like it never existed and starts over again.
So what went wrong? Well, I’ve braved the film again, and I’ve made some easy-to-follow bullet points explaining why I think the film went awry. J

- First of all, this movie is WEIRD. The entire thing is shot in a strange, dream-like manner. Reality and fantasy mix freely. We get flashbacks, and flashbacks within flashbacks. Gritty realism co-exists with mutated killer poodles. There’s no coherent tone or style to the thing.

- The casting doesn’t help. Oh, the actors are good. Sam Elliot is always good, and he helps ground the movie in some sort of realism. But Eric Bana, excellent actor though he is, is badly miscast. He’s huge, for a start - 6’3’’, and ripped - and doesn’t particularly convince in the role of a nerdy wimp. When he’s opposite Josh Lucas, you’re supposed to feel that Lucas is overshadowing him and intimidating him. Bana towers over him by 4 inches, and looks like he could rip him apart if he wanted. Instead, you get the feeling that Lucas is an annoying weasel, no threat at all, and you don’t know why Banner is putting up with it.

- Nick Nolte is entertaining, but for all the wrong reasons. He’s way over the top, but in his defense, it’s fun to watch. Belongs in a different movie, but still. Of special note is the scene in the generator room near the end where he just gives up any pretense of acting, and just starts yelling and waving his arms around like a nutter, at one point even just shaking himself and gibbering for no reason. Comedy gold.

- Adding to the general oddness is the director’s predilection for split screen effects and unusual visuals. It’s a brave attempt, but it doesn’t come across. Rather than using them for any sort of purpose, all we get is endless split screens showing the same events from different angles. It’s pointless and distracting. We also get odd freeze-frames, weird wipes, and in the most extreme example, when Josh Lucas is blown up, he’s cartoonishly surrounded by thick white lines separating him from the background. That’s also the scene that got the biggest laugh when I saw it in theaters - but I’m sure it wasn’t meant to.

- There wasn’t any other laughs, of course, because this is a VERY serious film. There’s almost not humor of any kind, and every event is treated as if it is of earth-shattering import. Which makes all the funnier, sadly.

- The effects, I suppose, are groundbreaking. But their integration into the film itself are a bit dodgy. From a technical standpoint, the Hulk himself is a great creation. He moves realistically, he seems to have a convincing heft, he has good facial expressions, and he does come across as an actual character, not a special effect. But he looks like he belongs in a CGI film. When he’s by himself, or interacting with other CGI creatures, he looks fine. But when you place him in a scene with humans, he looks badly out of place - as bad as Roger Rabbit or any other cartoon character. This is a pretty big problem for a move based around him.

- Or, I should say, supposedly based around him. The real emphasis in the movie is on the characters and their personal issues. Bruce Banner, and his father issues, and repressed memories. Betty Ross, and HER father issues. David Banner, and his murderous psycho issues, and so on. It’s a novel approach to the genre, certainly, but it’s hard to get into deep issues when your leading man turns into the Hulk every twenty minutes and breaks things. It just adds to the disjointed tone.

- You know what, actually? I don’t think the Hulk is a particularly interesting character. I did enjoy the TV show, but it was more about Banner - with a token Hulk-out in every episode. The Hulk himself just smashes things, and while that does make for some entertaining action scenes, it’s not a lot to base a movie around. This adaptation emphasizes the psychological issues more to fill in those gaps. The 2008 movie apparently goes the other route and emphasizes balls-to-the-walls action. We’ll see if it’s more successful.

Thankfully, this movie didn't do a lot of harm to the careers of everyone involved. Ang Lee rebounded with the sucess of Brokeback Mountain and Lust, Caution. Eric Bana's Hollywood career didn't suffer any noticeable harm. Sam Elliot remains a great character actor. Jennifer Connelly's career is still going well. Josh Lucas still hasn't broke out as a star, as many predicted he would, but he's still working steadily. So, thankfully, everyone was able to put this embarrassment behind them. Sadly, it was seen as a bit of a sign that Marvel's golden days had hit a bit of a bump in the road.

Hulk was released, as noted before, in the heyday of Marvel’s success in film. After this, their fortunes were noticeably a bit more lower. We did get Spider-Man 2, which was just as good as the first one. However, we then got two Fantastic Four movies, X-Men 3, and Spider-Man 3, which made money, but which were noticeably less well received than the movies before them. We also got Elektra and Blade 3 which were out-and-out bombs. So, one could argue that Hulk started a decline in Marvel’s movie business. Thankfully, it seems as though they’re pulling themselves out of the doldrums. Iron Man was superb, and the new Hulk does seem to be better received than this one. We’ve also got Captain America and The Avengers also on the way, along with Iron Man 2. So, maybe we’re on the up again. Time will tell…