The Hulk (1/2)
review by Jon Waterman

Jon mad. Hulk suck.

The Hulk is the latest comic book character to be transformed into a movie star (I use that term loosely, of course). A normal Bruce gets blasted with radiation. That interacts with some genetic mutations he inadvertently received from his scientist father. The result is that every time ol’ Brucy becomes angry, he turns into a giant green monster that can out run you, out jump you, out lift you and out eat you. In other words, the oldest story in the book.

Let me “cut” right to the editing. If there is anything that stood out more than the fifteen-foot green behemoth in throwing stuff in the middle of San Francisco, it would be the editing. Spliced awkwardly by director Ang Lee’s go-to guy, Tim Squyres, the film takes on a very comic book feel. At many points, the film shows multiple frames or “panels” on the screen simultaneously to convey the notion that you are watching a graphic novel come to life. While this sounds like an interesting idea (and it kind of is), the execution of this technique leaves much to be desired. The effect makes its point. That’s not the problem. The problem is it comes off as an excuse to use as many camera angles as possible for as long as possible. The problem is it neglects editing for dramatic effect to show-off a cool new way to do something. The problem is in how the swishing panels and dissolving backgrounds distract from the overall experience. I spent too much time looking at all the stuff moving in and out of every scene that I didn’t really concentrate on what was said.

However, when I did pay attention to the dialogue, I tended to zone out because I was so utterly bored. Scenes of exposition were dragged out to ungodly lengths for real apparent reason other than the writers never bothered to trim them down. Ah yes, we have writers to blame. James Schamus (Ang Lee’s go-to guy for writing), Michael France (the upcoming “Punisher” and “Fantastic Four” – I bet those will suck, too, now) and John Turman (producer on “Gleaming the Cube”) all worked together to bring you an excruciatingly long waste of time. It takes about an hour for the Hulk to show up. Why? The movie is named after the damn thing. We all know it’s going to happen. If you really need to explain how he became that way, do it after we see him destroy stuff. When he finally does make an appearance, he’s treated like a 1930s monster: hidden from the audience although his carnage is not. His face kept in shadows as if we haven’t already seen it on posters and fast food places and every other street corner. So, by the time I saw what’s his face…I didn’t care. I just wanted the movie to move faster. And it dragged more and more.

Each hero has a super villain to fight. Spidey had the Green Goblin. Batman has tons of bad guys to beat up on. The Hulk…. He gets the government and three mutant dogs. Woo frickin’ hoo. What kind of crap is that? I don’t want to ruin the end, but if you want to discuss the final 15 minutes with me, email me and I’ll tell you how incredibly dumb that was.

Back to harp about the visuals again. I bet I can count on one hand the number of static shots that were in this film. I understand the concept of an action film always wanting to move, but what is the deal with a rotating camera during the important dialogue? Ang Lee is known for making beautiful films. “The Ice Storm” and “Crouching Tiger” are two examples of this. “The Hulk” contains only a few minutes of truly marvelous Ang-esque material. One sequence is in the last fifteen minutes. The other is when a young Betty is alone at the ice cream parlor and sees the explosion in the distance. That shot is incredibly breathtaking. Unfortunately, the rest of the movie is filled with unimpressive standard stuff mixed in with hectic action sequences where nothing can truly be made out. What a waste of talent.

The acting. Before I mention performance. Why was there a separate person cast to play the Bruce that goes off to college? The appearance of an adult does not change that drastically from the time the movie really starts and then. It was pointless and could potentially confuse the audience. Stupid move. Ok…performances. Every single person was the same. All of them were two-dimensional people who spoke in monotone voices. For the men, it was a contest of whose voice could carry the most bass. For Betty (the only female – played by Academy Award winner Jennifer Connelly) it was a contest of whose career could go down the drain fastest. No one put nuance into the acting. It was all cut and very very dry. In fact, I think the computer generated Hulk was a better actor than the rest of the cast. He showed emotion.

Speaking of the namesake. I was actually surprised. Hulk looked better than I thought he would. He integrated and interacted within the frame with live elements pretty much flawlessly. His movements were as smooth as can be expected and like I said, he showed more emotion than his real counterparts. As anti-CGI as I am for things such as this, I can easily say it worked. The part I thought would be the worst turned out to be the best.
So, there you have it. Not much else I care to see other than I’m glad the top half of Bruce’s pants are always made of elastic. I don’t think this film warrants as much attention as I just gave it. Please, see something else.

respond to jon@filmbrats.com