Jessica Biel Joining a (Gray?) "Hulk?

We open the week with a pair of rumors regarding "The Incredible Hulk." Could the green giant end up being ... not so green? Plus, buzz tells us that mega-hottie Jessica Biel might be showing up in the semi-sequel.

While describing the next "Hulk" flick, producer Avi Arad used a phrase that might have meant nothing -- or maybe it didn't. "It's a new Hulk, new direction, new size, new color, new attitude. Anything that was done before is not in this movie," is what the Marvel guru had to say. Wait, what? "New color?" What's that all about? Either he meant a slightly different shade of green, an entirely different color altogether, or perhaps the grey shade that the Hulk used to be back in the earrrrly comic days. Guess we'll just have to wait and see...

Additional speculation indicates that Ms. Jessica Biel is being considered for a part in the second "Hulk" adventure -- although that's being listed as pure rumor at this point. If so, she'd be re-joining her "Illusionist" co-star Edward Norton in a decidedly different type of film.

Source: JoBlo's Movie Emporium

Comments

TortillaSoup

Richard Fernandez

wow, this already smells like crap.

Apr 23 - 02:31 AM

cgcbooks

Robert Kimberlin

Not if she's nude.

Apr 23 - 04:57 AM

cgcbooks

Robert Kimberlin

Not if she's nude.

Apr 23 - 04:57 AM

Defmonkey

Tyson Herritt

Has she ever been nude yet on the silver screen?

Apr 23 - 06:25 AM

adml_shake

Robin Goins

If they want me to see this movie with a fraken gray hulk, she'd better damn well be getting nude in it.

Apr 23 - 07:29 AM

Vitamin M

Matthew Haynes

I can't wait for this film...Beil nude would just be icing.

Apr 23 - 08:01 AM

cgcbooks

Robert Kimberlin

icing to lick off.

Apr 23 - 08:02 AM

cgcbooks

Robert Kimberlin

icing to lick off.

Apr 23 - 08:02 AM

Unbreakable Samurai

Unbreakable Samurai

With both Biel and Norton in this, it would go from a film a didn't give a shit about to one that I would have to see. I don't know about grey though, hopefully just a diffirent shade of green.

Apr 23 - 08:22 AM

blank blank

bob jones

im not one of those people who whine about small stuff in comic book adaptations (like those idiots who almost boycotted spiderman because they made the decision that parker didnt invent his webshooters, it was part of his mutation), but grey hulk? the greeness is part of the hulk character, like kermit the frog. a different shade of green is fine, but not grey...

Apr 23 - 08:34 AM

cgcbooks

Robert Kimberlin

Having the Hulk grey would be like making a Barney movie and having him yellow.

Apr 23 - 09:14 AM

arendr

Arend Anton

you comic book guys aren't picking up the slack here as you usually do. i did a little research and found that there is indeed a grey incarnation of Hulk in the comics.

jessica biel is insanely hot. let's hope her acting is up to snuff.

Apr 23 - 09:14 AM

cgcbooks

Robert Kimberlin

But your average moviegoer knows the Hulk as being green.

Apr 23 - 09:17 AM

arendr

Arend Anton

the average moviegoer would think batman was a campfest with homosexual overtones were it not for Batman Begins.

Apr 23 - 09:34 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

This strange animal that we call "the average moviegoer".... Schumacher and camp thought they were writing for this creature back when they did the original Batman movies. And that's why they failed. It took the Nolan bros and Goyer to step in and remind their idiot colleagues that these films should be written for us, the die-hards. Because these are the people who made these characters so successful in the first place. Think about it. Watching a movie is a lazy pasttime when compared to reading... anything. Write these films for the fans who support the original 2-D medium. This is why we should be excited about Marvel breaking out with their own film company. They'll write the films for us, and maybe we'll stop getting hackneyed renditions of great time honored mythology.

Apr 23 - 12:04 PM

highdough

Richard Blascock

If you make a movie for the die-hard fans, make sure you keep the budget under $20 million, because you're not going to get many people to see it. The problem with the Batman franchise was not that they were doing what the average moviegoer wanted, the problem was that they were making bad films. Period. The Christopher Nolan batman was a very good film. I have never read a batman comic book in my entire life, but I thought the last Batman was easily the best one so far.

What makes me laugh is when fanboys get all hot and bothered because the movie isn't following what they know. Make a good movie, and I, as well as many others, will come. Make a bad film, and I'll stay away.

Apr 23 - 06:06 PM

rgallitan

robin thompson

Failed? By what standard? I remind you that, adjusted for inflation, Batman Begins is only the fourth highest grossing Batman movie ever. That might not be your standard, but it's Hollywood's, and it always will be.

Apr 24 - 04:03 PM

highdough

Richard Blascock

They failed because they were horrible. Batman Begins was not as kid friendly as the last two, so it didn't have as wide an audience. I'm betting, however, that Batman Begins made more money overall (inflation accounted for) than the last few. Remember, box office is only a small part of it. And the franchise is much healthier now than it was after the last Batman. No one was looking forward to another Batman until Batman Begins. Now people are talking positively about the series again.

Apr 24 - 05:23 PM

rgallitan

robin thompson

Batman and Robin failed. It is rightly called the franchise-killer. It is famously one of the worst, maybe THE worst high-budget movie ever made. But let's not confuse it with its predecessors. Forever did very well (and, while in the campy style, is very unfairly lumped together with B&R in terms of quality). It handily defeats Begins at the box office (which is usually about half these days, not a small part), but if you have home video figures, we can talk about that - and keep in mind that DVD has completely changed the home market.

Meantime, B.O. is all we have, and the results are thus: Batman '89 comes just shy of Spiderman for the title of most successful superhero film of all time, while the others are all hovering around the $200mil (adjusted) mark, with B&R on the low end, and Forever on the high. The difference in return on investment between a "good" movie and a "bad" one? Absolutely nothing quantifiable. There isn't even any difference between dark and campy. I wouldn't be surprised if right now Warner is hoping the difference is the Joker. If that fails, they might try Vicki Vale. For my money, the difference is: keep it simple, keep it moving, and keep it cheap.

Apr 24 - 07:18 PM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

As a writer myself, rgallitan, box office receipts will never be my standard. Writers, if the art of story is going to be preserved at all, must retain their aesthetic values and honor the art, no matter how out of control, out of wack, or ass backwards the other aspects of the process gets. The writer must have some sense of order in honoring Story -one of this world's oldest and most broadly significant of crafts. So whether you're right or not about Batman Begins being the fourth highest grossing Batman film, it's entirely irrelevent in the context of quality. The film has a level of quality in and of itself that exists entirely apart from the box office numbers, which, like you say, are arbitrarily affected by other things, marketing, product tie-ins, and yes, inflation among them. As for Hollywood's standards, there was a time when they had more respect for the stories and their tellers. But these days, to echo Shyamalan's Elijah Price, we are living in mediocre times.

Apr 25 - 08:02 AM

highdough

Richard Blascock

The average moviegoer did not see the first Hulk.

Apr 23 - 10:09 AM

cgcbooks

Robert Kimberlin

You might be right.

Apr 23 - 11:28 AM

sharpless

Matthew Sanderson

Screw the average moviegoer. Make a good film and it won't matter. The Hulk is the Hulk, regardless of his color, and people will know that. I hope they go for the grey Hulk. That was how the Hulk first looked, and it'd be almost like starting over. I'm all for it. Just write a good story, please.

Apr 23 - 10:56 AM

the-russian

Nick Danczyk

I'll attempt to one up you on that. If I remember correctly, Hulk was always meant to be grey, but after the 1st issue, they had problems printing the grey color of his skin, so they just changed it to green. In later years, they reintroduced the grey in different stories, w/ different hulks, kind of as a throwback to the first issue.

Apr 23 - 12:08 PM

arendr

Arend Anton

i'd say we need some kind of bat-signal to call on you guys when needed, but you all seem to show up anyway :)

that's an interesting story. i like knowing those little trivias.

Apr 23 - 12:15 PM

cgcbooks

Robert Kimberlin

But your average moviegoer knows the Hulk as being green.

Apr 23 - 09:17 AM

arendr

Arend Anton

the average moviegoer would think batman was a campfest with homosexual overtones were it not for Batman Begins.

Apr 23 - 09:34 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

This strange animal that we call "the average moviegoer".... Schumacher and camp thought they were writing for this creature back when they did the original Batman movies. And that's why they failed. It took the Nolan bros and Goyer to step in and remind their idiot colleagues that these films should be written for us, the die-hards. Because these are the people who made these characters so successful in the first place. Think about it. Watching a movie is a lazy pasttime when compared to reading... anything. Write these films for the fans who support the original 2-D medium. This is why we should be excited about Marvel breaking out with their own film company. They'll write the films for us, and maybe we'll stop getting hackneyed renditions of great time honored mythology.

Apr 23 - 12:04 PM

highdough

Richard Blascock

If you make a movie for the die-hard fans, make sure you keep the budget under $20 million, because you're not going to get many people to see it. The problem with the Batman franchise was not that they were doing what the average moviegoer wanted, the problem was that they were making bad films. Period. The Christopher Nolan batman was a very good film. I have never read a batman comic book in my entire life, but I thought the last Batman was easily the best one so far.

What makes me laugh is when fanboys get all hot and bothered because the movie isn't following what they know. Make a good movie, and I, as well as many others, will come. Make a bad film, and I'll stay away.

Apr 23 - 06:06 PM

rgallitan

robin thompson

Failed? By what standard? I remind you that, adjusted for inflation, Batman Begins is only the fourth highest grossing Batman movie ever. That might not be your standard, but it's Hollywood's, and it always will be.

Apr 24 - 04:03 PM

highdough

Richard Blascock

They failed because they were horrible. Batman Begins was not as kid friendly as the last two, so it didn't have as wide an audience. I'm betting, however, that Batman Begins made more money overall (inflation accounted for) than the last few. Remember, box office is only a small part of it. And the franchise is much healthier now than it was after the last Batman. No one was looking forward to another Batman until Batman Begins. Now people are talking positively about the series again.

Apr 24 - 05:23 PM

rgallitan

robin thompson

Batman and Robin failed. It is rightly called the franchise-killer. It is famously one of the worst, maybe THE worst high-budget movie ever made. But let's not confuse it with its predecessors. Forever did very well (and, while in the campy style, is very unfairly lumped together with B&R in terms of quality). It handily defeats Begins at the box office (which is usually about half these days, not a small part), but if you have home video figures, we can talk about that - and keep in mind that DVD has completely changed the home market.

Meantime, B.O. is all we have, and the results are thus: Batman '89 comes just shy of Spiderman for the title of most successful superhero film of all time, while the others are all hovering around the $200mil (adjusted) mark, with B&R on the low end, and Forever on the high. The difference in return on investment between a "good" movie and a "bad" one? Absolutely nothing quantifiable. There isn't even any difference between dark and campy. I wouldn't be surprised if right now Warner is hoping the difference is the Joker. If that fails, they might try Vicki Vale. For my money, the difference is: keep it simple, keep it moving, and keep it cheap.

Apr 24 - 07:18 PM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

As a writer myself, rgallitan, box office receipts will never be my standard. Writers, if the art of story is going to be preserved at all, must retain their aesthetic values and honor the art, no matter how out of control, out of wack, or ass backwards the other aspects of the process gets. The writer must have some sense of order in honoring Story -one of this world's oldest and most broadly significant of crafts. So whether you're right or not about Batman Begins being the fourth highest grossing Batman film, it's entirely irrelevent in the context of quality. The film has a level of quality in and of itself that exists entirely apart from the box office numbers, which, like you say, are arbitrarily affected by other things, marketing, product tie-ins, and yes, inflation among them. As for Hollywood's standards, there was a time when they had more respect for the stories and their tellers. But these days, to echo Shyamalan's Elijah Price, we are living in mediocre times.

Apr 25 - 08:02 AM

highdough

Richard Blascock

The average moviegoer did not see the first Hulk.

Apr 23 - 10:09 AM

cgcbooks

Robert Kimberlin

You might be right.

Apr 23 - 11:28 AM

sharpless

Matthew Sanderson

Screw the average moviegoer. Make a good film and it won't matter. The Hulk is the Hulk, regardless of his color, and people will know that. I hope they go for the grey Hulk. That was how the Hulk first looked, and it'd be almost like starting over. I'm all for it. Just write a good story, please.

Apr 23 - 10:56 AM

arendr

Arend Anton

the average moviegoer would think batman was a campfest with homosexual overtones were it not for Batman Begins.

Apr 23 - 09:34 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

This strange animal that we call "the average moviegoer".... Schumacher and camp thought they were writing for this creature back when they did the original Batman movies. And that's why they failed. It took the Nolan bros and Goyer to step in and remind their idiot colleagues that these films should be written for us, the die-hards. Because these are the people who made these characters so successful in the first place. Think about it. Watching a movie is a lazy pasttime when compared to reading... anything. Write these films for the fans who support the original 2-D medium. This is why we should be excited about Marvel breaking out with their own film company. They'll write the films for us, and maybe we'll stop getting hackneyed renditions of great time honored mythology.

Apr 23 - 12:04 PM

highdough

Richard Blascock

If you make a movie for the die-hard fans, make sure you keep the budget under $20 million, because you're not going to get many people to see it. The problem with the Batman franchise was not that they were doing what the average moviegoer wanted, the problem was that they were making bad films. Period. The Christopher Nolan batman was a very good film. I have never read a batman comic book in my entire life, but I thought the last Batman was easily the best one so far.

What makes me laugh is when fanboys get all hot and bothered because the movie isn't following what they know. Make a good movie, and I, as well as many others, will come. Make a bad film, and I'll stay away.

Apr 23 - 06:06 PM

rgallitan

robin thompson

Failed? By what standard? I remind you that, adjusted for inflation, Batman Begins is only the fourth highest grossing Batman movie ever. That might not be your standard, but it's Hollywood's, and it always will be.

Apr 24 - 04:03 PM

highdough

Richard Blascock

They failed because they were horrible. Batman Begins was not as kid friendly as the last two, so it didn't have as wide an audience. I'm betting, however, that Batman Begins made more money overall (inflation accounted for) than the last few. Remember, box office is only a small part of it. And the franchise is much healthier now than it was after the last Batman. No one was looking forward to another Batman until Batman Begins. Now people are talking positively about the series again.

Apr 24 - 05:23 PM

rgallitan

robin thompson

Batman and Robin failed. It is rightly called the franchise-killer. It is famously one of the worst, maybe THE worst high-budget movie ever made. But let's not confuse it with its predecessors. Forever did very well (and, while in the campy style, is very unfairly lumped together with B&R in terms of quality). It handily defeats Begins at the box office (which is usually about half these days, not a small part), but if you have home video figures, we can talk about that - and keep in mind that DVD has completely changed the home market.

Meantime, B.O. is all we have, and the results are thus: Batman '89 comes just shy of Spiderman for the title of most successful superhero film of all time, while the others are all hovering around the $200mil (adjusted) mark, with B&R on the low end, and Forever on the high. The difference in return on investment between a "good" movie and a "bad" one? Absolutely nothing quantifiable. There isn't even any difference between dark and campy. I wouldn't be surprised if right now Warner is hoping the difference is the Joker. If that fails, they might try Vicki Vale. For my money, the difference is: keep it simple, keep it moving, and keep it cheap.

Apr 24 - 07:18 PM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

As a writer myself, rgallitan, box office receipts will never be my standard. Writers, if the art of story is going to be preserved at all, must retain their aesthetic values and honor the art, no matter how out of control, out of wack, or ass backwards the other aspects of the process gets. The writer must have some sense of order in honoring Story -one of this world's oldest and most broadly significant of crafts. So whether you're right or not about Batman Begins being the fourth highest grossing Batman film, it's entirely irrelevent in the context of quality. The film has a level of quality in and of itself that exists entirely apart from the box office numbers, which, like you say, are arbitrarily affected by other things, marketing, product tie-ins, and yes, inflation among them. As for Hollywood's standards, there was a time when they had more respect for the stories and their tellers. But these days, to echo Shyamalan's Elijah Price, we are living in mediocre times.

Apr 25 - 08:02 AM

highdough

Richard Blascock

The average moviegoer did not see the first Hulk.

Apr 23 - 10:09 AM

cgcbooks

Robert Kimberlin

You might be right.

Apr 23 - 11:28 AM

sharpless

Matthew Sanderson

Screw the average moviegoer. Make a good film and it won't matter. The Hulk is the Hulk, regardless of his color, and people will know that. I hope they go for the grey Hulk. That was how the Hulk first looked, and it'd be almost like starting over. I'm all for it. Just write a good story, please.

Apr 23 - 10:56 AM

cgcbooks

Robert Kimberlin

You might be right.

Apr 23 - 11:28 AM

cgcbooks

Robert Kimberlin

It just might be cool to see the Hulk cloned and then having 10 or fifteen of them beating the holy crap out of each other and anyone or anything standing in there way.

Apr 23 - 11:32 AM

Kid_Ikarus

Josh Thornton

Bring on The Abomination...

Apr 23 - 11:41 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

This strange animal that we call "the average moviegoer".... Schumacher and camp thought they were writing for this creature back when they did the original Batman movies. And that's why they failed. It took the Nolan bros and Goyer to step in and remind their idiot colleagues that these films should be written for us, the die-hards. Because these are the people who made these characters so successful in the first place. Think about it. Watching a movie is a lazy pasttime when compared to reading... anything. Write these films for the fans who support the original 2-D medium. This is why we should be excited about Marvel breaking out with their own film company. They'll write the films for us, and maybe we'll stop getting hackneyed renditions of great time honored mythology.

Apr 23 - 12:04 PM

highdough

Richard Blascock

If you make a movie for the die-hard fans, make sure you keep the budget under $20 million, because you're not going to get many people to see it. The problem with the Batman franchise was not that they were doing what the average moviegoer wanted, the problem was that they were making bad films. Period. The Christopher Nolan batman was a very good film. I have never read a batman comic book in my entire life, but I thought the last Batman was easily the best one so far.

What makes me laugh is when fanboys get all hot and bothered because the movie isn't following what they know. Make a good movie, and I, as well as many others, will come. Make a bad film, and I'll stay away.

Apr 23 - 06:06 PM

rgallitan

robin thompson

Failed? By what standard? I remind you that, adjusted for inflation, Batman Begins is only the fourth highest grossing Batman movie ever. That might not be your standard, but it's Hollywood's, and it always will be.

Apr 24 - 04:03 PM

highdough

Richard Blascock

They failed because they were horrible. Batman Begins was not as kid friendly as the last two, so it didn't have as wide an audience. I'm betting, however, that Batman Begins made more money overall (inflation accounted for) than the last few. Remember, box office is only a small part of it. And the franchise is much healthier now than it was after the last Batman. No one was looking forward to another Batman until Batman Begins. Now people are talking positively about the series again.

Apr 24 - 05:23 PM

rgallitan

robin thompson

Batman and Robin failed. It is rightly called the franchise-killer. It is famously one of the worst, maybe THE worst high-budget movie ever made. But let's not confuse it with its predecessors. Forever did very well (and, while in the campy style, is very unfairly lumped together with B&R in terms of quality). It handily defeats Begins at the box office (which is usually about half these days, not a small part), but if you have home video figures, we can talk about that - and keep in mind that DVD has completely changed the home market.

Meantime, B.O. is all we have, and the results are thus: Batman '89 comes just shy of Spiderman for the title of most successful superhero film of all time, while the others are all hovering around the $200mil (adjusted) mark, with B&R on the low end, and Forever on the high. The difference in return on investment between a "good" movie and a "bad" one? Absolutely nothing quantifiable. There isn't even any difference between dark and campy. I wouldn't be surprised if right now Warner is hoping the difference is the Joker. If that fails, they might try Vicki Vale. For my money, the difference is: keep it simple, keep it moving, and keep it cheap.

Apr 24 - 07:18 PM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

As a writer myself, rgallitan, box office receipts will never be my standard. Writers, if the art of story is going to be preserved at all, must retain their aesthetic values and honor the art, no matter how out of control, out of wack, or ass backwards the other aspects of the process gets. The writer must have some sense of order in honoring Story -one of this world's oldest and most broadly significant of crafts. So whether you're right or not about Batman Begins being the fourth highest grossing Batman film, it's entirely irrelevent in the context of quality. The film has a level of quality in and of itself that exists entirely apart from the box office numbers, which, like you say, are arbitrarily affected by other things, marketing, product tie-ins, and yes, inflation among them. As for Hollywood's standards, there was a time when they had more respect for the stories and their tellers. But these days, to echo Shyamalan's Elijah Price, we are living in mediocre times.

Apr 25 - 08:02 AM

the-russian

Nick Danczyk

I'll attempt to one up you on that. If I remember correctly, Hulk was always meant to be grey, but after the 1st issue, they had problems printing the grey color of his skin, so they just changed it to green. In later years, they reintroduced the grey in different stories, w/ different hulks, kind of as a throwback to the first issue.

Apr 23 - 12:08 PM

arendr

Arend Anton

i'd say we need some kind of bat-signal to call on you guys when needed, but you all seem to show up anyway :)

that's an interesting story. i like knowing those little trivias.

Apr 23 - 12:15 PM

arendr

Arend Anton

i'd say we need some kind of bat-signal to call on you guys when needed, but you all seem to show up anyway :)

that's an interesting story. i like knowing those little trivias.

Apr 23 - 12:15 PM

What's Hot On RT

Critics Consensus
Critics Consensus

The Other Woman Short on Laughs

Total Recall
Total Recall

Cameron Diaz's 10 Best Movies

WonderCon
WonderCon

175 cosplay pictures

24 Frames
24 Frames

Experiments Gone Wrong!

Find us on:                 
Help | About | Jobs | Critics Submission | Press | API | Licensing | Mobile