THE INCREDIBLE HULK review

For all the well-publicized inner squabbling that went on with this film behind the scenes, the finished product is not the disjointed mess that one might expect.  Yes, there was clearly some editing done – whenever anyone actually stops to have a conversation with another person, the film has a tendency to cut out mid-sentence if that is a viable moment for building tension.  In other words, character drama is definitely sacrificed in favor of keeping the story rolling along.  Whether more character drama would’ve actually helped the movie, we may never know.

The action scenes are well achieved, as director Louis Leterrier is clearly more of a visual stylist than an introspective storyteller.  The problem is, this property needs both in order for it to really click.  So far, both Ang Lee and Leterrier have each fallen just short of the mark, for opposite reasons.  But like Lee’s “Hulk”, this one also dares to give us a computer generated green goliath – but thankfully, five years worth of technical progress have made for a more believable creature - if only marginally so.  When the Hulk effortlessly rips a car in half, it is undeniably cool, even if there is an overall been-there done-that feeling when it comes to watching these scenes of mass destruction.  I don’t know what it is, but when we remain half-bored even as a spectacle such as this unspools before our eyes, something is wrong.  Maybe, in a cinematic age of having witnessed photo-realistic dinosaurs and Transformers wreak havoc on civilization, the Hulk himself just can’t measure up.  Or, maybe it’s the fact that the major crowd-pleasing element of the Hulk is the promise of massive rampages, and in order to really grab us during your average summer movie season, those said rampages really better be impressive.  And of course, they can’t ever top the dinosaurs and giant robots.  Or, maybe it’s the fact that this “Hulk” feels a slightly warmed over, with little new brought to the proceedings.  In any case, all the effort and arguing over this film have added up to a film that’s more forgettable than not, and considering the depth and possibilities inherent in the source material (both comic book and 1970s TV series), that’s simply off-base.

This film lacks the magnetism of its cinematic cousin “Iron Man”.  Part of it may be that the character of Banner doesn’t allow Edward Norton the fun possibilities that Robert Downey Jr. was given with Tony Stark.  Perhaps it’s the rigidity of Norton himself.  Norton doesn’t make a lousy Bruce Banner by any stretch, but I can’t say that his considerable acting chops make for a superior take on the role compared to any we’ve seen before.  As Banner’s long-suffering girlfriend Betty, we have Liv Tyler, who just looks tired here, contrary to her ordinary effervescent self.  In an otherwise well-cast film, this is the one minor misstep in that category.  Actually, maybe I’ll take that back – Tim Blake Nelson shows up halfway through the film doing an extremely loopy take on shady gamma scientist, Samuel Sterns.  His antics are funny to a point, but also clearly out of place.  Tim Roth does what he can with his cliché angry soldier role, as does William Hurt as General Ross, who is clearly made up to resemble Sam Elliott, who will always be the one true “Thunderbolt”.

The logic that leads into the final showdown is terribly flawed, but never mind that – Hulk and Abomination duke it out in the home of all great Marvel characters (except this one, ironically), New York City!  Speaking of the greater Marvel universe, the on-screen unification of all these characters is one of the most promising aspects of Marvel’s newfound independent production status.  That said, this film is at times distractingly preoccupied with planting seeds and teasing future stories and characters.  As a longtime Marvel reader, I knew what was going on (Tim Roth’s super soldier injection = unspoken nod to Captain America), but I suspect that much of it will only add up to confusion and distraction for the average viewer.  The worst offender has to be the final scene, which features a well-publicized cameo by another popular Marvel character.  It’s essentially the same scene as the post-end credits scene in “Iron Man”, only this one comes before the credits – a big mistake, as it leaves the audience with a big fat tease that dramatically means nothing to the story we just experienced.  Making it worse, the final shot of Banner in the preceding scene was clearly intended as to be the end of the movie proper.

Many will enjoy this “Hulk” film, as there is much to enjoy in the moment of watching it.  But it’s the type of fleeting enjoyment that will be gone by the time you get to your car to leave the theater.  Call it a “popcorn movie”, call it what you will, but I think it’s reasonable to demand a little more than this kind of superficial experience when it comes to a modern-day Jekyll & Hyde tale with forty-plus years of depth and back story.  Maybe one day we’ll see the alternate cut that everyone was fighting about behind the scenes, and maybe it will deliver a little bit more.  But I doubt that the changes will be radical enough to elevate this “Hulk” to earn its “Incredible” title.  In the meantime, enjoy the popcorn, true-believer.

- Jim Tudor