ROTTEN TOMATOES: Louis Leterrier Promises Action-Packed Incredible Hulk Comments

Louis Leterrier Promises Action-Packed Incredible Hulk

by Jeff Giles | March 17, 2008

Summary

After sitting through what they felt was a curiously action-deficient Hulk in 2003, some fans of Marvel's ragin' green-skinned behemoth have viewed this summer's Louis Leterrier-directed reboot with skepticism. Back to Article

(1-20 of 60 posts) | Reply

Gimy writes:
on Mar 17 2008 06:13 AM

ok...i stopped reading, thanks for the spoiler dude. i'd rather not know that much of anything before i see a movie, especially not what the opening scene is about. in any case, admit you made a horrible trailer...and move onto a better one, or else you won't sell the general public. hearing the guy say its not a drama fest is sort of reassuring, though i don't expect him to NOT sell us on his concept though. guess we'll see...

(Reply to this)

largely writes:
on Mar 17 2008 06:28 AM

They need to tweak that CG some more so it won't look like that cartoon/video game that Ang Lee made. Maybe a visit down to New Zeland to WETA is in order. Well hey at least someone who resembles Bruce Banner in appearance and personality is actually playing him in this movie.

(Reply to this)

Bloody Mathias writes:
on Mar 17 2008 06:57 AM

I personally think the HULK character is doomed for Hollywood.

Unless someone comes along and makes a HULK Begins, i think he's too one dimensional of a superhero, kinda like Superman. This is coming from a man who's never read a HULK comic book so there's a big chance i could be wrong.

(Reply to this)

thistimeitwillbedifferent writes:
on Mar 17 2008 07:05 AM

I completely agree with the fact that Hulk is doomed. I still don't really understand why they went back to it; I think the problem is with the character rather than the first film. This also seems to be the overwhelming feeling across the net as well (article on my journal) 40% of Empire readers would rather eat their own feet than watch it!!!

(Reply to this)

TombstoneLawDog writes:
on Mar 17 2008 07:07 AM

Time to open myself up to ridicule..

I kind of dug the trailer. I'm looking forward to this. And that's DESPITE the fact that I've been railing against Letterier since he made such a mess of Transporter 2.

Ed Norton is among my favorite actors, and whatever else is going on in this film, it's kind of like the shot of street cred that Christian Bale is giving to the new Terminator movie for Norton to be in this thing.

This is not my top-anticipated movie of the summer, but I'm pretty sure I'll see it.

(Reply to this)

Shadowflare writes:
on Mar 17 2008 07:08 AM

Did we really need two sucky Hulk movies? Or is this an experiment to see how many different ways we can make a single movie franchise suck?

(Reply to this)

crystalwhiteeyes writes:
on Mar 17 2008 07:21 AM

Action-Packed?? The trailer begs to differ...

(Reply to this)

TombstoneLawDog writes:
on Mar 17 2008 07:28 AM

spelling correction (since I piss on everbody else about it)

it's 'Leterrier'

(Reply to this)

LordAlexx996 writes:
on Mar 17 2008 07:54 AM

I agree that the Hulk is kinda like Superman in the fact that they are pretty much invincible. But at least in this movie we see the Hulk fight someone close to his own strength and can possibly kill him, unlike the first one where all he had was Dogs on Roids.

(Reply to this)

jacog writes:
on Mar 17 2008 08:16 AM

Action packed, eh? Aliens vs. Predator 2 was action packed also... but was it any good? Noooooo.

(Reply to this)

arendr writes:
on Mar 17 2008 08:28 AM

Come on now, crystalwhiteeyes. Obviously the trailer isn't action-packed because it's designed to build up to the suggestion of action. Must every trailer show 25 explosions to put asses in seats?

I think this movie looks like it's worth a shot. I don't particularly find the Hulk to be a very interesting character, but perhaps this movie will change my mind.

(Reply to this)

Shatter24 writes:
on Mar 17 2008 08:38 AM

Agree w/ TombstoneLawDog and Arendr, the trailer gave me a taste of excitement. The Hulk portrayal looks a lot better than Ang Lee's Jolly Green Giant (I like the way his dark hair looks especially). The trailer was too short to judge the movie's plot, but I loved seeing Ed Norton open his eyes and have them green (just like the TV show, awesome!) A lot of people remember the television show, so Letterier has to please two masters, comic book fans and people who remember the television show. From what I see here, w/ the reluctant Bruce Banner and the running from the military, and a super villian from the actual comics (though he doesn't look like it), this movie has everything it needs to be a success. If it doesn't please the people who like Lee's Hulk, that's too bad, there wouldn't need to be a reboot if that film was generally seen as a success.

(Reply to this)

minderbinder writes:
on Mar 17 2008 08:53 AM

Still not the tiniest bit interested.

Any word on what the budget is this time around? The last action-lite version was about $135M.

(Reply to this)

jeremyd4 writes:
on Mar 17 2008 08:54 AM

????????????

ok.. can we get some clarification here. Is this a REBOOT or a SEQUEL??? ...because first you say reboot, then you infur the story continues where the last film left off - in Brazil.

(Reply to this)

Weston B writes:
on Mar 17 2008 09:18 AM

I thought the trailer wasn't bad. I'm exctited about this movie (of course I was also excited about the first one and left the theater pissed). The main problem this movie will face is the fact that its getting released the same summer as Iron Man, The Dark Knight, and Indiana Jones. If it came out sooner during this season of crappy movies it would probably do much better.

(Reply to this)

Matanuki writes:
on Mar 17 2008 09:23 AM

In reply to this comment (#1638186)
I'm with you guys on this one. The trailer looks good. And everything I've seen and read so far suggests this film has the right touch. Of course, we have to actually see it before a final analysis. But so far so good. I'm baffled by all the negativity on these boards. But whatever.

(Reply to this)

Yjeizz writes:
on Mar 17 2008 09:46 AM

Even though Ed Norton has no control when the Hulk is on the screen, I hope they don't abuse the CGI Monster VS CGI Monster in CGI World privalage.

Unless they decided to bring back Lou Ferrigno from the original show, which would be an amazing feat in cinema...the animators can do whatever they want.

I just hope Ed can pull through and keep the talking scenes up to par...since I believe that the only two different scene changes are:

1. People talking.
2. CGI fighting.

(Reply to this)

bigbrother writes:
on Mar 17 2008 10:29 AM

As long as action packed doesn't equal devoid of plot and character arc they should be fine. You'd have to make a pretty serious effort to screw up a movie liek this with that kind of acting talent.

(Reply to this)

AlbertBrodsky writes:
on Mar 17 2008 10:33 AM

I'm a little surprised at all the negativity myself. I wasn't a fan of the first one. I felt like Hulk's size got way out of proportion (he used to be the same size as the "Thing" in the comics) and the father/son storyline seemed unnecessary to me. Honestly, I only watched it once and that seemed like enough, but this new one has some potential.

I have faith in Ed Norton. He's one of Hollywood's guys who seems to get it (minus Keeping the Faith and Death to Smoochy). Hopefully he recognizes the appeal of the tv show and the comics and tries to stay faithful to both (mainly comics please).

I think it would have been interesting if they would have used a bodybuilder for the part of Hulk. They could have done it like Lord of the Rings where you have a giant Gandolf mixed with all the smaller hobbits. Mix in a little latex and some CGI and you might have had something completely original that didn't look like a complete CGI mess. I can tell everytime spiderman goes from a real actor to CGI in those movies and it annoys me.

BTW, I liked Sam Elliot as General Ross in the first one, he's a great actor who nailed the part, but it's not like William Hurt is a step down and anyone who says Liv Tyler isn't hot can meet me at the bike rack after school.

(Reply to this)

Elixor writes:
on Mar 17 2008 10:43 AM

In reply to this comment (#1638233)
I'm in the camp of looking forward to this movie. I thought the trailer was fine (just OK), the action sounds like it's going to be there, and the Hulk looks great!

Look, between this movie and the last one, the CGI has looked awesome. The hair, the skin, the eyes, all look great to me. The guy is green, obviously that's not going to not look realistic, but what's with all the complaining? Just because everything isn't fast and blurry to hide the CGI, like in the Spiderman movies, or the Matrix movies, doesn't mean it's lower quality.

We'll see how the movie turns out in the end.

(Reply to this)