Okay, what's up with this Hulk movie?

Smith Jerrod:

 

IIRC, Time Warner owns DC but its licensing agreements are all over the place. It was one of the big reasons, a few years back, why there were a lot of Batman toys but not Superman toys or JLA toys. One company owned the Superman rights, another owned the Batman rights, etc. I think they've cleaned it up since then, but some of it may be lingering.

 

The man's only acting credit is a recurring role on Sex and the City and you want him to be Captain America?

 

Understood. I think I was just so happy to finally see some action in that movie that I didn't care.

 

A fair point. Shouldn't be a problem in this one. First off, it's not an origin story. He's already the Hulk, so we don't have to go through that whole rigamarole (other comic book movies really need to go back to doing this, i.e. 1989 Batman -- two minutes of origin, 118 of plot).

Also, I read that Norton, who we've already established likes to have a lot of creative input, lobbied hard to make it about 2:15, but the studio nixed that, chopped it to 2 hrs flat and made it faster paced. We'll have to wait for DVD to see who was right.

 

Hellz ya!

 

Hopefully that will help, though sometimes the origin story can work if it is done well (Iron Man, Spider-Man and Batman Begins).

 

It was one of the things that was true to the original comic book, however.

I'm waiting for the sequel titled Joe Fixit.

 

Haven't the Hulk's power levels....fluctuated....in the comics over the years? That's not one I have read very often.

A Joe Fixit movie could be fun.

 

The 2003 Hulk was so bad that, as the credits rolled, I had to spray the room with air freshener.

I saw it while I was out of town at a conference. It was one of those sort of sleepless away-from-home, insomnia nights. I kept thinking, "This movie just has to get better." It didn't. I felt cheated.

 

So did I/nerd