ROTTEN TOMATOES: Hulk Sequel Clarification ... Kinda

Hulk Sequel Clarification ... Kinda

by Scott Weinberg | January 19, 2006

Yesterday we shared with you a news piece from the IMDb's "WENN news" that said two things: That David Duchovny was likely to star in a "Hulk" sequel, and that said sequel would be going direct-to-video. But then Marvel Master Avi Arad called AICN to set the record straight. (All of which explains why 85% of the RT news pieces come solely from Variety & The Hollywood Reporter.)

"So - what is happening with HULK? Well, MARVEL is going to make the second one themselves with Universal distributing it... so this will be a Marvel production outside of the Paramount distribution deal that they set up last year. Right now, Avi is talking to various directors and writers and he intends to make a direct sequel... not a reboot. He feels that the HULK was a bit too big, so the big green behemoth will be not so Joseph Young of Africa. He's very excited, as always, about the Emerald Ass-Kicker, and at this point there is NO recasting in place or planned."

--

Now, I didn't hear anything in there about the sequel NOT going direct-to-video. "Universal will distribute it" could mean either, I suppose.

Anyway, bottom line: There will be a "Hulk 2" someday.

Related Items

Celeb:	David Duchovny
	Avi Arad
Movie:	Hulk

(1-20 of 21 posts) | Reply

pota1967 writes:
on Jan 19 2006 10:01 AM

[b];-)[/b]
It will still suck

(Reply to this)

glenbo writes:
on Jan 19 2006 11:55 AM

Who the fuck cares who's distributing this shit? All I know is that this is gonna suck^2.

(Reply to this)

InfinityCorp writes:
on Jan 19 2006 01:20 PM

umm.. Even if you thought the first one did suck. (Which I didn't compared to the majority of dribble out there.) 250 Million dollars does NOT suck. There will be a Hulk 2 and it will be pretty entertaining. Possibly not a great movie, but entertaining none the less...

(Reply to this)

rcbaker87 writes:
on Jan 19 2006 04:07 PM

[b]How did the first make $250,000,000?[/b]
I mean thats 249,999,991.75 more than BloddRyane.

(Reply to this)

South_park300 writes:
on Jan 19 2006 07:09 PM

i think youre giving bloodrayne too much credit...

(Reply to this)

Macedonian writes:
on Jan 19 2006 07:29 PM

i think if done right it shud be a pretty good movie, the first one was boring at times and i think it couldve done without bruce's father mutating himself, but i enjoyed the first one for what it is so ill be there to see the sequel for sure. when arad says "the hulk was a bit too big" does he mean the hulk's size was too big in the movie( which i dont agree with at all) or does he mean the movie its self was too big?

(Reply to this)

elziard writes:
on Jan 19 2006 08:51 PM

kudos to marvel for attempting to protect their property -- from turning into 'batman and robin'? who knows, but they can't blame ang lee for 'blowing it'. i really enjoyed the first one but recognize it's faults.
it was a good effort and marvel will attempt to 'make right' one of their most recognized properties.

(Reply to this)

YourFavoriteNewKid writes:
on Jan 19 2006 10:20 PM

Mulder might be good...

(Reply to this)

puablo writes:
on Jan 20 2006 05:48 AM

[b]Total Crap[/b]
Everyone saw the Hulk when it came out because they either didn't read, or intentionally ignored, the reviews. I know I did. It had a huge opening and then a legendary dropoff in attendance the second weekend. Anyone else who saw it afterwards simply refused to believe the terrible word of mouth. That movie sucked hard. As a matter of fact, it sucked so hard, I now cringe when seeing Ang Lee holding any award for Best Director. It's an awful film to make a sequel to, but they make sequels to awful films all the time now. It seems to me that as long as a movie makes any money whatsoever in its first weekend, a sequel gets commissioned 3 days after the movie's release. And people wonder why so many movies are crap these days?

(Reply to this)

Trio writes:
on Jan 20 2006 09:04 AM

[b]Hollywood Today...[/b]
This is another example of how much Hollywood know a fool and his money is soon parted. It will probably outdo the 1st simply because of the new rears that will plop down into the theater seats and those returning in hopes that this one will be better than the 2003 release.

(Reply to this)

Scarborough Fair writes:
on Jan 20 2006 12:29 PM

awww man. i can't believe everyone hated this. i liked it so much. it had problems and all, but so much of it was pure awesome. anyone whose superpower is getting REAL angry and then going insane and smashing things...i mean, i loved it. the first time he turns into the hulk and SMASHES his office? isn't it because a bunch of crap happens but ultimatley he stubs his toe on a mop bucket? i laughed till i cried about that. and he tears some mutant dogs to pieces...that frog explodes... his dad's a crazy scientist...its got everything im looking for in a movie.
so a sequel? one where everyone is trying to make it way better than the original? sweetass, i say. i'd like to see steve buschemi play the hulk or someone like that, but we'll see. dear god not mulder. that man is incapable of anger.

(Reply to this)

dsence writes:
on Jan 20 2006 05:55 PM

In reply to this comment (#830205)
bloodrayne was awesome, acadamy material, it should make over 300 domestic

(Reply to this)

renodc writes:
on Jan 20 2006 07:46 PM

This is one of those films that people seem to really like or they just really hate it (as the previous posts indicate). I thought the Hulk was pretty good. It had it's flaws, but overall it wasn't all that bad.
I thought it was noble for Ang Lee to try and make the Hulk into a Greek like Tragedy, but ultimately it ended up coming across to most people as boring.

Who knows maybe if Ang Lee had kept everything the way he had it, but removed Jennifer Connelly and had Bruce Banner and Josh Lucas' character end up falling in love and hooking up then maybe the Hulk might have won a Golden Globe or even an Oscar. Better yet, maybe he could have had Bruce's father paralyzed in their final battle, and then have Bruce euthenize him then turn his anger on the true villian George W. Bush. Now that would have been a Triumph of filmmaking!! The critics would have swooned.

(Reply to this)

Spike1967 writes:
on Jan 22 2006 12:11 PM

Whew glad they cleared that up, now we can all sleep.

(Reply to this)

Callpacas writes:
on Jan 23 2006 02:03 AM

can;t stand the 24- style look. and the ending is real weird. but non-the-less, better than king kong for me. At least his feelings are believeable. Hopefully i can get the Hulk 2 dvd here.

(Reply to this)

DJ Jay Lion writes:
on Jan 23 2006 12:52 PM

[b]Green Giant[/b]
The Hulk in not a superhero, he is an anti-hero. Bruce Banner wasn't exposed to radiation and said "hey, I think I'll be a hero." The Hulk is an alter-ego, mostly anger. One incredible fact about the Hulk's powers, every time he gets angrier, his power increases even more. He is practically unstoppable.

This is why most people didn't "get it" and got bored. No one can relate to that much anger, especially Buddists. Ang Lee had done a terrific accomplishment in bringing this monster to life on the big screen. I don't think there's anyone else who could have done better.

(Reply to this)

Nice Guy Ed writes:
on Jan 23 2006 03:13 PM

Personally, I always thought Duchovny should have been cast as Reed Richards in FF (then again, after seeing the actual movie...)

(Reply to this)

oilysoils writes:
on Jan 23 2006 04:24 PM

[b]HULK 2: INCREDIBLE HULK![/b]
I think this hulk movie gets too much flack. It was an intelligently written film and the dialogue was sharp!. It's only problem was that it was a bit long in the tooth and lead to boredom which you don't want with this kind of film. There was far too lil hulk and the hulk design was not frightening enough. i certainly hope they do a more kirbyesque design in the sequel. He's a monster not a green giant!!!!!!!!!! But that being said this film was waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better than daredevil and fantastic four. Hire a horror or sci-fi director to make part 2 and I don't mean Uwe (#$%^$^%^%!) Boll!!!!!!!! Most importantly get a good writer. Maybe marvel should consider letter the spider-man scribes peen the next film. I think too many people were looking to see the hulk tv series played on on the big screen, and that is not the true version of the hulk. the tv series though I loved it was "Hulk Light". But the one thing this film could use is Bixby's earnest portrayl as banner which I hope the new writer willl include as part of banner's personality in the next film. If its gonna be a sequel please keep Eric Bana, he's an awesome actor!

(Reply to this)

kubrickfan writes:
on Jan 24 2006 10:05 AM

I thought the Hulk was a great movie, and I have talked to many other people who have felt the same. Everyone just wants to jump on the bandwagon, and treat it like it's Batman and Robin. I'm sorry, but if youn think the Hulk is a horrible movie, than you haven't seen many, because it's still better than 80% of the other movies out their. I loved how they had the balls to give it a long, drawn out story, instead of making an hour and a half long mindless action movie such as daredevil. The visual effects were good too, they were far from bad. It wasn't as good as Spiderman, X-men, or Blade, but it was certainly better than Daredevil, The Punisher, Fantastic Four, Electra, Catwoman (am I forgetting any?). Look at how everyone loves Batman Begins. That had a very long and drawn out story, with long gaps between the action, yet it was a great movie. Besides, there should be a long build up for a character like the Hulk... Look how long the build was in the Frist Superman movie.

(Reply to this)

Zach Houchins writes:
on Jan 24 2006 03:29 PM

i didnt really like the first hulk. im not saying it sucked or was a bad movie, i just didnt really like it. yes, it was way better then the fantastic four, batman & robin, or daredevil, but it had nothing on Batman Begins or Spiderman. Everyone was saying that the hulk was boring, but i actually thought the character seens were good. i think the action seens were kinda fakey and far-fetched, espiecally at the end. i dont think it needs a sequel. and the reason i thought Batman Begins was so good was that there was alot of character, and the action scenes seemed real and weren't way out there. Begins knew where to draw the line, and thats why i liked it so much better.

(Reply to this)

Related Links

David Duchovny

Related Articles

Most Discussed

Latest News

Latest Interviews

Latest Features

Sponsored Links