Hulk re-do
 

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/index...d=36670&type=0

Ok, this is beyond stupidity. We've come so far that now we will have a remake for a 3 years old movie (which was far from being bad IMHO). Somebody kills Arad while it's still time, he's like a little kid who likes to break his pretty toys. And a budget of 150m was a little bit expensive for a draft, no ?
At least maybe with this "re-do", it will be the occasion to see that Hulk wasn't a so terrible movie.

Is that why the Bana one's generally trashed? Because it wasn't the comic, stroke for stroke? Because that's a fucking godsend for any film adaptation, and something of which we need shitloads more.

They do it with asian movies all the time, why not with their own?
Doesn't suprise me.
And, I like the Hulk movie pretty much. Can't really understand why people hate it so much...
For example, most say they like it WORSE than Daredevil...

For once I agree with Cal. While there were a lot of missteps in the Ang Lee movie, there were moments of sheer inspiration that outstripped parts of the best comic book movies like Batman Begins.

The stupid thing is that no one is going to go see this movie.

No one wants to see a retelling of the Hulk story so soon. Maybe if this producer wanted to remake the movie in another 10-15 years...

I dont even know if they could do one, given that they're opted to make a Hulk 2 that Eric Bana is contracted to be a part of.

To be honest, I haven't seen the Ang Lee movie. I do think it's a great thing though that people actually care enough about the comic book source material for this to even possibly even happen. Think back to Batman Forever and Batman & Robin. I think it's a great thing for comic book movies and comics in general that this sort of attention is being paid to the source material.

Its a thin line to walk. Internet nerds who scream about continuity with books, video games and comics are amongst the least educated you can find.

Oh sure, a scene for scene exact reproduction of a comic book (or novel or short story) would be pretty boring, and not to mention extremely long. Plus, film is a different media—you need to adapt the concept.

But this is a far cry from something like Batman Forever. Oh lordy.

I read that Joel Schumacher bears utter contempt for the franchise, and that B&R was a malicious pisstake.

Batman Forever as well. Although I didn't want to bring it up... :tpg:

Usually to chide Lucasfilm's idiotic "levels of canon" bullshit. Yes, I talk about it but only as far as that the films, movie novelizations and radio dramas are the only canon in existence. Everything else is just fapping for fanboys.

What about Sin City?

What. That makes no sense. The radio dramas? They are fantastic and all—in fact I have the scripts to them and recordings (on cassette though) sitting on the shelf next to me—but I don't see how they're in any way more cannon than anything else produced not by Lucas.

Double Post:
Well, Sin City had the original artist & writer (Frank Miller) co-directing. There isn't a whole lot you can argue in terms of artistic intent there.

"HEY THATS NOT THE WAY MILLER WA-- O WAIT"

The radio dramas were personally sanctioned by Lucas when the movies first came out. They handed Brian Daily the original scripts for him to "translate" into radio dramas (forcing him to write both expanded scenes and exposition). Hence - they're completely canon.

EDIT: By Radio Dramas, I mean the ones based on the original trilogy, not the Jedi Knight/Dark Empire/etc series

Right, I was talking about the Brian Daley ones. If you'll remember though the ROTJ Radio Drama didn't come out until 1996.

"Personally sanctioned by Lucas." What? How is that any different from the status of the original Timothy Zahn trilogy?

If we could avoid the Big Lucas and SW discussion, I'd be glad. Does it always end like speaking about lightsabers, or ?

It's still from the original Lucas/Kasdan screenplay, though.

Excellent question.

Zahn's is simply an "offically licensed" product. He's able to write a Star Wars novel, sell it and make money from it without Lucasfilm suing his ass. Remember that dumb bitch that sold her Star Wars fanfiction on Amazon.com? Thats the difference.

As for the offically sanctioned question...

From the Star Wars Radio Drama Boxed Set - "The radio project offically began when Star Wars creator George Lucas donated the story rights to KUSC-FM, the National Public Radio affliliate of his alma-mater..." (He also sold KUSC the ability to use all the SFX and music from the Star Wars movies for a dollar)

It's been clairified a couple of other times by interviews with LucasLicensing - including one especially boring and detailed interview in Star Wars Galaxies - I think you can find a copy of that interview on the internet somewhere.

Last post by me in this microthread:

I was under the impression that Lucasfilm granted licenses to each book when the story idea was pitched to them. If they didn't like the story ("We kill everyone and introduce brand new characters named Tidus, Squall and Cloud"), they could reject it.

I see your point about the Daley scripts being written from the original screenplays, but that still doesn't mean they are cannon the same way the movie is. From what you're saying, NPR/Daley had creative control, not Lucas, which, IMHO, at least, excludes it from a "strict" definition of cannon.

If LeHah wants to continue this, can we get a split?

We'll continue this in PM

To get back on topic, I would actually like to see a re-do of The Hulk. It would be interesting to see how audiences would respond to it coming out so soon, and it would be especially interesting if deviated hugely from Ang Lee's version (not necessarily by sticking closer to the comics, but that's one possibility).

From what I remember about the trailers, my main gripe was the hugeness of The Hulk. I'm not 100% familiar with it, but doesn't the hulk only become slightly bigger than the average human when he transforms (which is how he's still able to wear the same pants)?

I think the Hulk's size has changed with time - remember when Sentinels first came out in X-Men they were only 10 feet tall or so? Also - I think that the madder Hulk gets, the bigger he gets. Or something.

Yup I didn't read the old comic books, but I heard that he's never get bigger, the angrier he get's, the stronger. The normal savage Hulk is 7'2, The Grey Hulk 6'6, and the Professor is about 7'6. But after time, looks like he was drawned bigger in the comic books, compared to his earlier days. The angrier the bigger is something related to the movie, which doesn't bother me as long as he's not Galactus sized.

P.S. : Thanks both of you for being civilized ppl. :)

I liked the Hulk movie for the most part. I think it's way too soon to do a remake of it already (yeah, definitely wait at least 10-20 years before you do a remake of a film).

Makes you wonder if Hollywood is running low on good scripts or something lol.

Apparently not given that Bana's contract was with Universal and since this "do-over" is one of the first Marvel in-house pictures his contract is void.

Cinescape has something about this including new candidates for Bruce Banner that they're looking for to replace Bana with...Brendan Fraser...among those in the running:
http://www.cinescape.com/0/editorial...8&obj_id=51641

So no Jennifer Connelly? Fuck that shit.

Jennifer Connelly was awesome in Ang Lee's Hulk. She didn't really do much but react to the whole situation, but she does it in such a beatiful way that it works. Lee's Hulk wasn't half as bad as people made it out to be. He just took his time with a dramatic element instead of 2 hours of "HULK SMASH!" However, I didn't care for Nolte's performace, or his character. Absorbing man is NOT the Hulk's dad... and besides, he's primarily one of Thor's enemies.

I watched Lee's Hulk a few weeks ago with his audio commentary... and maybe it's just that Lee is a quirky guy, but it seemed like he was a little off base the way he described everything. It seemed like he was trying to make an art film out of the project. I think he was an odd choice for the role of director for the movie. The only thing I'd seen by him before Hulk was The Ice Storm.

Instead of a new Hulk flick, I'd really rather see them make a film out of the first arc of Mark Millar's Ultimates. They made that cartoon which was pretty cheesey. I'd like to see them take it seriously and go big budget.

If they're going to start over from scratch, I'd like to see Banner played by somebody a bit more frail and geeky looking than Bana. Bana played Hector in Troy! Not exactly your nerdy scientist type. I'd also like to see them throw in Abomination, or maybe Doc Samson.

Slightly off topic, but mentioned in the source article: anyone else think Ant-Man is an out-of-place choice for film development?

Actually, given the endurance of 'People shrink to bug size" movies (see: the Ant Bully), I'd say it's one of the smartest choices for film adaption Marvel's ever made.

That means Eric Bana just made his salary for not making a movie. :(

You clearly underestimate the power that a comic book movie has. Especially a comic book movie starring such a recognizable character.

While I don't disagree that this is "too soon", it will make money. Elektra made money.

I add nothing to this topic.
 

If this gets made I hope they pay as much attention to the Hulk's special effects as Lee did. The desert scene was absolutely amazing to watch. I honestly would rather have a sequel, but more Hulk is always a good thing.

Slightly off-topic, but from the same article, I'm glad they're making new X-men, Wolverine and Spider-Man cartoons. Hopefully they're a little more mature than the older ones. But I doubt that.

I think this is a pretty stupid idea. We have to sit through his origin again? Let's just have a sequel where Hulk can blow shit up from the very beginning and give him an opponent that can ALSO blow shit up and have them slug it out in Berkeley or something. That'd be hot.

I didn't find anything wrong with the Ang Lee film (at least, nothing that makes it a terrible, awful movie). I liked the CG and most of the action. The story was fun. The only thing I didn't like was the father, whose final battle with Bruce at the end was stale. Other than that, it was one of the better comic book films. It actually made me appreciate the Hulk as a character, as before I never really liked him.

I had a few problems with the original that makes it rank towards the bottom of my comic book movie list. However, those don't warrant them remaking it. That's almost like saying remaking Superman IV is a good idea. On top of that, almost all movies get about decade or more grace period to be redone, if they're going to be. Hulk 2 is already in the works from what I know; they should just wait to see how the sequel goes and what the response is. Wait, that might be a bad idea. If it's successful, they might go, "People like Hulk movies!" And if it isn't successful, they might go, "We can make people like the Hulk more!" It's all a slippery slope.

A remake of Hulk does sound interesting, but only in capable hands.

I liked the direction that Ang Lee took. It was a serious and dramatic tragedy-type movie but I have trouble applying that level of emotion to a walking green giant. If he had done a comic book based movie off of a character that was more down to earth or dark and menacing, then I would have been sold on his perspective.

nothing +
 

Uh, nevermind. I don't want a Hulk remake... lol. There's an article on IGN (can't post the link because I don't have enough posts, it's under the comic-con section) that says director Louis Leterrier is signed to do it.

This guy directed Transporter 2, which in my opinion was one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Although he also did Unleashed, which really wasn't that bad. Just ok. I'm scared to see what he's gonna do with this.

They seem to be re-inventing the franchise, but if this ones a flop too. We can probably say goodbye to Hulk movies for a long time.