It takes its time setting up the plot and characters, which works because you have almost fully fleshed out characters and not cardboard cut outs. Overall, Hulk is a refreshing change from standard and bland superhero movies. Apart from that the visual effects are top notch. However the long shots of him, especially in the desert scenes, look a bit cheesy but definitely not as bad as some critics have been saying. The close ups of the hulk work, because his facial expressions are well done and you can actually feel sympathy for him. Now to the much criticised CGI, which for me is a mixed bag. This works most of the time,as it gives the film a unique look thats different from other comic book movies. Unlike other movies based on comic books, Hulk actually looks like a comic book, due to the split screens. Eric Bana is decent as the hulk, but I prefer Mark Ruffalo as the hulk in the avengers. The acting is quite good in the film, especially Nick Nolte, who almost steals the show as Bruce Banner's father, David Banner. A few years later I bought the DVD to give it another try, and I was very surprised with how good it actually was, now that I had gotten older and could appreciate the style, acting and pretty much everything else. At the time I didn't understand or care about any of the split screens, dream sequences, etc, I was just waiting for the hulk to show up and destroy stuff.(The hulk dosen't show up till about 40 minutes into the movie, by the way.) I eventually began to get restless because it is a very slow movie and when it was over I felt very disappointed. What I had been expecting and hoping was just endless scenes of the hulk smashing sh#t up. My expectations at the time had not been met. When I first saw it when I was like nine or ten I was confused, shocked and somewhat disappointed.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |