babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » right brain babble   » culture   » Toronto critics love HULK

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Toronto critics love HULK
Jimmy Brogan
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3290

posted 20 June 2003 09:26 AM      Profile for Jimmy Brogan   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Toronto papers love HULK

Toronto Star: Beast with a heart

quote:
Of all the comic book characters created by artist Jack Kirby and writer Stan Lee in the Marvel Comics "Silver Age" of the early 1960s, The Incredible Hulk was the most brutally conceived and bluntly anguished.
A rampaging green mountain of muscle and rage, this atomically mutated alter-ego of the sissyish military physicist Dr. Bruce Banner was really more monster than superhero. As rendered by Kirby's dynamic lines, he looked like a shaved gorilla with bangs.


While, like Spider-Man, Fantastic Four and the X-Men, the Hulk put in his time clobbering typically grotesque Kirby megavillians (in the very first issue of The Incredible Hulk — May 1962 — the bad guy was an encephalitic dwarf Commie called "The Gargoyle"), the heart of the ongoing series was the persecution of this poor irradiated anthropoid by the tanks, bazookas and helicopters of the U.S. military. If Spider-Man was capable of getting girlfriends and one half of the Fantastic Four was happily married, the irredeemably anti-social Hulk — who'd burst out of Banner's britches every time the guy got mad — was doomed to a state of simmering, angry-man solitude.


This is the Hulk brought so smartly to the screen by director Ang Lee and screenwriter James Schamus: A hounded, misunderstood monster in the pulp-tragic tradition of King Kong and Frankenstein, a pathetic freak dogged by armies, tortured by memories and victim to his own inadequately digested "issues."


Toronto Sun: Heroic giant wound up tight in this incredible flick

quote:
Can we really believe in a grumpy computer-generated green giant protagonist? Hey, we did it with Shrek. Don't be dissuaded by the trailers, which pulled the cover off Universal's summer franchise monster in various stages of CGI unreadiness as far back as the Super Bowl. The fact is, the Hulk himself is the best thing about Hulk, art-filmmaker Ang Lee's earnest attempt to, as he put it, "make a delicacy out of American fast food."
For those willing to go along for the ride, there's a startling level of verisimilitude given this 15-foot mesomorph by the boys at Industrial Light & Magic -- skin tones, shadows, hair waving in the wind, the eyes. And let's not forget those purple pants that always rip just so when Bruce Banner gets mad and the Hulk bursts out.

A superhero art flick. Sounds good.

[ 20 June 2003: Message edited by: JimmyBrogan ]


From: The right choice - Iggy Thumbscrews for Liberal leader | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 20 June 2003 10:15 AM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I don't know what to think. The preview CGIs I've seen are among the worst animated character images in recent memory. But Ang Lee's filmography is so impressive: Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon; Eat Drink Man Woman; The Ice Storm. I almost want to see it just to see how Ang Lee translated the story to the screen, bad character imaging or no. And now I read that the CGI on the full-length feature is way better than on the trailers? Damn. There goes my money, I have no choice.
From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
ronb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2116

posted 20 June 2003 01:24 PM      Profile for ronb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Not so fast... Groen at the Globe gave it 2 stars and said the action sequences are dull, which looks about right to me from what I've seen of the trailers. Ang Lee's not exactly an action master, Crouching Tiger, while beautiful, was pretty darned sluggish from a Hong Kong/Wu Ping perspective.

Sam Raimi, on the other hand, is definitely an action master...


From: gone | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Black Dog
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2776

posted 20 June 2003 02:08 PM      Profile for Black Dog   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Aw, whatever. Spiderman was a piece of crap, even by comic-book standards (if anything, the characters came off as more one-dimensional than in the flick than in the books). Raimi completely ignored the whle pointof the Spiderman character, which is the contrast between the "real" nerdy, uncertain Ego of Peter Parker and the cocky, wise-cracking Id of the web-slinger. Instead, they just made Spidey into Perter Parker in a mask. Booooooring.

The HULK is a far more interesting character anyway and, CGI limitations aside, I'm excited to check it out.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Willowdale Wizard
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3674

posted 20 June 2003 02:16 PM      Profile for Willowdale Wizard   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
piece of crap, piece of crap, friendly neighbourhood piece of crap?

given a choice of big-budget let's-see-it so-i-can-credibly-talk-about strange-looking-hollywood-mass-culture, i'm choosing drew barrymore, i mean, charlie's angels over the hulk.

[ 20 June 2003: Message edited by: Willowdale Wizard ]


From: england (hometown of toronto) | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Black Dog
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2776

posted 20 June 2003 04:22 PM      Profile for Black Dog   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Good call, W.W.!
From: Vancouver | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
ronb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2116

posted 20 June 2003 04:32 PM      Profile for ronb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Just putting my consumer protection hat on here...

Warning: Demi Moore is in the Charlies Angels thingie.


From: gone | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 20 June 2003 05:01 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I imagine I'll go see the thing anyway, and just kind of watch around Ms Moore, the way you do with Disney cartoons, the main characters of which are almost invariably dull as dishwater.
From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
rasmus
malcontent
Babbler # 621

posted 20 June 2003 08:04 PM      Profile for rasmus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
If memory serves, the angry green Marvel Comics superhero who is the subject of Ang Lee's new movie used to be known as the Incredible Hulk. At some point, though, he shed that defining adjective, and the film, which opens today nationwide, is just called "The Hulk." It might be described, in any case, as incredible, but only in a negative sense: incredibly long, incredibly tedious, incredibly turgid. As for the grumpy green giant himself, I'm sorry to say that he is not very credible at all.

Ouch.

I see what AO Scott means about the Hulk not being very credible.


From: Fortune favours the bold | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 20 June 2003 09:04 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Well, just so. If I remember my San Francisco geography aright, not even the Hulk could walk straight up that street.
From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
majorvictory
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2878

posted 23 June 2003 05:49 AM      Profile for majorvictory     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Mr. Cranky sez:

Bruce Banner (Eric Bana) is a seemingly normal man who, on occasion, gains incredible strength, flies into a rage, loses higher brain function, turns green and ends up face down in shredded clothes remembering little to nothing about the whole affair. Ostensibly, this is caused by a combination of altered genes, gamma radiation and a loss of emotional control. I have a shorter word for it: "tequila."
"The Hulk" is directed by Ang Lee, which demonstrates that even respected directors like a big fat limousine stuffed full of cash once in a while. Lee amuses himself mightily with his generous budget, playing with all sorts of tricks such as split screens, wacky scene transitions and shots textured with unnecessary computer effects. The whole thing plays like a PowerPoint presentation.

Bruce tries to cope with his condition with the help of fellow scientist and love interest Betty Ross (Jennifer Connelly), but soon every weasel in the military industrial complex is out to kill him. Or clone him. Or incarcerate him so lonely women can write to him in prison.

The real obstacle Bruce must overcome, however, is coming to terms with his childhood, specifically his dad, mad scientist David Banner (Nick Nolte). Lee, respected director that he is, brings us "Hulk as metaphor." The Hulk represents repressed emotions unleashed. If the generals really wanted to stop him, they'd assault him with talk therapy and a Zoloft milkshake.

"The Hulk" is not just crap -- it's green crap, and if that's not a bad sign, I don't know what is.

Want more? Visit Mr. Cranky's complete guide to this week at the movies!


From: Toronto | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Jimmy Brogan
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3290

posted 23 June 2003 07:21 PM      Profile for Jimmy Brogan   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Saw it Saturday with 5 friends of varying movie tastes. They all rated it between 7 and 9 out of 10.

Ang Lee’s HULK is not as much fun as the X-Men movies or Spider-man but it is a commendable attempt at a serious comic-book film.

Lee takes his time introducing the back story of the abusive and demented father who experiments on himself and passes his altered genes on to his son Bruce. We are shown the essence of the repressed memories and emotions that eventually are released when Bruce Banner turns into the green mountain of rage.

This Hulkless first hour will no doubt leave many with short attention spans cold. To me this lengthy exposition was interesting and necessary. When HULK finally appears in all his CGI glory it’s a cathartic release from the built up anticipation. The CGI action scenes are tremendous, with several jaw-dropping moments. The CGI is by no means perfect, but it is good enough and as good as it could be at this point in time.

The film could have used some lighter moments, like maybe a joke or two, but overall I would give it an 8 out of 10.

Can't wait to see it again.


From: The right choice - Iggy Thumbscrews for Liberal leader | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
rob.leblanc
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2475

posted 23 June 2003 08:41 PM      Profile for rob.leblanc     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I wonder how long this comic book craze is going to last for Hollywood. It's this, the League of Extraordianry Gentlemen (which, I have to admit, I'm looking forward to), Fantastic 4, Superman, rumor is buzzing about Aquaman and Captain America........
From: Where am I? Where are YOU? | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca