New Hulk Film

[Madame Adequate]

The other Hulk movie was awesome and anyone who says otherwise is being a pretentious douchenozzle.

[Flying Mullet]

The trailer was alright and the "slow-motion-jumping-at-each-other-to-attack-at-the-end-of-the-trailer" bit is very tired and uninspiring at this point.

[Del Murder]

5 years between remakes is a pretty short time.

Imagine if they decided to redo Lord of the Rings this year. Although that's totally different because they got it right the first time.

However, I still maintain it is impossible to get Hulk 'right'. Hulk just isn't the most interesting of superheroes.

[Raebus]

Well, I'd better change my opinion since MILF says we aren't allowed to have our own opinion otherwise we'd be douches.

[Madame Adequate]

Well, I'd better change my opinion since MILF says we aren't allowed to have our own opinion otherwise we'd be douches.

You have accurately assessed the situation and I applaud your acceptance of the truth.

[Balzac]

Here's a list of upcoming titles from Marvel.

Marvel Announces Movie Line-Up | BeyondHollywood.com | Asian, Foreign, Horror, and Genre Movie Reviews and News

[edczxcvbnm]

I liked the first one until the last part with fighting electric dad at the end XD Hulk isn't that interesting and I don't see a remake being that much better.

[Yamaneko]

Marvel has some of the dumbest superheroes. Spiderman is probably the best they have and it still doesn't come close to the awesome that his Batman.

[Shoeberto]

I've always thought Marvel had the better superheroes, just because they tried to explain their origins using (mostly) real world phenomenon, despite how pseudoscientific. Like... Superman is just an alien from some far off planet who just happens to like fighting crime on earth, where Spiderman was an ordinary teen who had his genes messed up by a radioactive spider bite which gave him his abilities. The only DC one that's really like that is Batman which, admittedly, is awesome.

[Germ Hamee]

Only? That's a pretty decent amount of time. It's not like they're pushing these turds out once every two years.

Lol, so it's okay to do a remake after five years, but not after two? I don't know about that - they both seem ridiculously soon to me. I'd rather if they insist on flooding the market with remakes that they stick to things that are actually... you know, dated. Even if they mucked it up the first time, I'm with Del Murder in that it's not like The Incredible Hulk is some masterpiece of comic book literature that deserves a magnificent film adaptation.

But I'll admit that I'm mostly sick of seeing super hero movies. Fantastic Four pretty much killed it for me.

[Roto13]

It's not a remake any more than Ultimate Spider-Man is a comic book remake of the original Spider-Man.

[Germ Hamee]

...which were thirty-seven years apart from start to start. I think that qualifies as dated enough to be worth re-imagining. This Hulk business doesn't.

[Kawaii Ryûkishi]

Why not? Why is it okay for sequels to come out within five years, but not completely new interpretations of the source material?

[Calliope]

...which were thirty-seven years apart from start to start. I think that qualifies as dated enough to be worth re-imagining. This Hulk business doesn't.

Say what? Stan Lee & Company were obviously unhappy with the first movie, realised a bad thing when they saw it, and are now trying to put things right with Ed Norton at the helm. Don't like it? Don't watch it.

In the meantime, Robert Downey Jr still goes to the top of the class, after Mr Welsh.

[Germ Hamee]

Why not? Why is it okay for sequels to come out within five years, but not completely new interpretations of the source material?

I'm not really down with the sequels business either, unless the story really merits it. This just comes down to my general dismay at the overwhelming amount of sequels and remakes coming out (most of which aren't very notable), while good original material is getting trapped in their shadows. I understand it's a business, and what people already know sells better than anything else, but it's still bothersome. Particularly in this case because we JUST saw a man become the Hulk. Why do we need to see it again? Even if they mucked it up the first time, there's no reason we should be paying for their lack of quality control. But--the masses apparently enjoy watching the same things over and over again, and as such, continue paying to flog the cash cow.

This would actually be pretty cool if this really was a radically different interpretation of The Hulk, but it looks pretty much like the same things with different faces and minus the picture-in-picture stuff.

But I'm afraid this could start to wander off topic pretty quickly, so I'll digress and we'll just see how it goes.