Skip to main content

Angry man is unsecure.

Hulk
(2003)

(SPOILERS) I’m not a Hulk apologist. I unreservedly consider it one of the superior superhero adaptations, admittedly more for the visual acumen Ang Lee brings to the material than James Schamus, Michael France and John Turman’s screenplay. But even then, if the movie gets bogged down in unnecessarily overwrought father-son origins and dynamic, overlaid on a perfectly good and straightforward core story (one might suggest it was change for the sake of change), once those alterations are in place, much of the follow through, and the paralleling of wayward parents and upright children, or vice versa, translates effectively to the screen, even if the realisation of the big green fella is somewhat variable.


Lee’s eventual movie, relatively quickly – and unjustly – rebooted by Marvel, who wanted something a little more homogenous (and less tinged by the smell of failure, albeit it wasn’t a flop and The Incredible Hulk failed to do appreciably better at the box office), was the distillation of thirteen years of development hell, numerous writers and several attached directors (a first-timer bullet was dodged when Jonathan Hensleigh exited; studios still aren’t getting wise to this, hence the past year’s The Mummy and Geostorm). The crediting of France and Turman with Hulk’s regular writer Schamus reflects the extent of their contributions (including Turman’s focus on Hulk vs General Ross, dad Brian – here David – Banner deriving from the comics, and France’s attention to the father-son theme, including David’s self-experimentation).


Bruce Banner: The gamma just unleashed what was already there. Me.

Arguably, Bruce gets short shrift in Hulk, but it’s both a symptom of intent (overshadowed by his alter-ego and his dad, and his girlfriend’s dad, the nerd must turn) and failing to give Eric Bana enough to work with within those restrictions. To the extent that the Bruce-Betty (Jennifer Connelly) relationship travels, it’s down to Connelly’s performance, with Bruce made into a passive, cycle helmet-wearing geek; he’s like Beaker, but less ginger, and there needs to be more revealing to us what Betty sees in him, rather than having to assume it.


I think Bana’s actually pretty good in the role, but he’s put on a back foot by what he described as Lee’s “morbid” approach (the director saw the movie as a Greek tragedy). The result is that, after several hours of wresting with his demons, when dad yells “Stop your bawling!” during the final act, we can’t help but concur. There are glimmers of a more engaging inner/outer struggle (“When I totally lose control, I like it”) but it isn’t remotely approaching the level of Jeff Goldblum in The Fly (knowing something terrible has happened, but find its lure irresistible, both for protagonist and audience).


But that’s a drawback, not a deal-breaker. Likewise, the sedate pacing. I have no problem with the relative shortfall in action, as Hulk only ever feels like a drama first to me (which is what Lee clearly intended), “punched up” visually and with the occasional set piece. The CGI creation of the over-sized, irate fellow himself has its problems – the one-shot transformation(s) just plain doesn’t work, he’s surely a touch too big, and Hulk clenching fists and raging on the spot, his lack of neck bulging, is unintentionally funny rather than impressive – but in key sequences, which I’ll come to, it still works like gangbusters today. Danny Elfman’s score is pretty distinctive and appropriately different too, evidently a consequence of being brought into replace Mychael Danna but liking what he heard and incorporating it accordingly.


I could quite see the David Banner plotline floundering completely. Certainly, if they had continued in the vein of his younger self, as per flashbacks. This element doesn’t fully compute to my mind; certainly, his decision to kill his son, drawn as it is from Brian in the 1980s comics, comes across as a plot contingency rather than fully thought out and integrated. 


Once Banner Sr has become old man Nolte, though, the actor is able to carry Brian’s inconsistencies by sheer dint of his shambling, dishevelled wreck of a man. It’s a great performance, and the actor more than delivers, be it exulting in the potential of science unbound (“To improve on nature. To go beyond limitations, give men the power to go beyond God’s boundaries”) or describing the fateful moment of his wife’s death, expounding as he does a kind of queasy poetry (“It was as if she and the knife merged”) that foretells his own mutated form, and peaks in wracked acknowledgement of the irreversibility of his act (“You cannot imagine the unbearable finality of it”).


David Banner: I didn’t come here to see my you. I came here to see my son. My real son. The one inside of you. You’re only but a superficial shell, a husk of flimsy consciousness ready to be torn off at a moment’s notice.

Mostly, though, Nolte is fantastically unhinged, assuming he has more knowledge, more insight, more awareness of the bigger picture than anyone else, and he kind of does (“My son is unique. That’s why you can’t relate to him” he says, mocking Betty with kindness, as a prelude to unleashing his hulk hounds on her). His dismissal of his son’s angst-ridden state even seemingly pre-empts, in meta-fashion, the criticisms of Bana’s Bruce. This sequence, in which he reveals the mind of one who sees life, and people generally, as disposable stepping stones on the path of his greater quest, is as cold and brutal as they come, provocatively stating that the Hulk is his real offspring and Bruce is a mere vessel.


David’s willingness to self-medicate may, in this version, be the seed of Bruce’s metamorphosis – or perhaps it was the ignominy of having to grow up with prominently protruding ears –  but it’s also the most compelling change of form here. You can feel it, tangibly, whereas the green pixels of the virtual Hulk are only ever pixels. When David doses himself with gamma radiation in an attempt to replicate the effect it had on his son, the result is deliriously trippy and has just that right air of “What has gone wrong/happened to me?” absent from 99% of superhero material, where mutation only has positive, strengthening results.


If the transformation he undergoes includes elements of the comics’ Absorbing Man (taking on the properties of the material he comes into contact with, although, why then doesn’t he also turn into air in that case?) and Zzzax (becoming an electricity being), the effects have the grim inevitability of Cronenberg as David changes form, merging and coalescing (blood from a cut in his hand balloons forth and is reabsorbed), with a hint of the T1000. Much of what we see in Hulk is more Altered States than classic Marvel (complete with flotation tank).


Betty: He also saved my life.
Colonel Ross: Yeah, from a mutant French poodle.

Another thing Nolte has going for him here, besides chops, is that he’s also very funny.  In an antic fashion, sure, but funny nonetheless. Entertainment Weekly’s review at the time called Hulkhumourless and intellectually defensive about its own pulpy roots” (the critic must have loved Nolan’s Batman). And sure, at its core, this is an undeniably serious telling of the comic book, but it’s clearly not without a sense of humour. Look at the sequence where Bruce and Betty contemplatively revisit his childhood haunt and Lee pulls back to reveal a whole squad of military goons keeping pace with them and tell me he doesn’t have a firmly installed funny bone; admittedly, one he’s calling on rarely and judiciously.


Bruce: Talbot, you’re making me angry.

Josh Lucas’ Talbot is so gleefully rotten he makes Nolte’s mad rants look positively restrained. Lee clearly relishes getting right in there on every malignant contortion of Lucas’ face as Talbot revels in torturing poor Bruce. Indeed, so comic book is his villainy that Lee steps up to provide a patently ridiculous freeze frame death that turns into a comic book centre piece.


In contrast, Sam Elliott’s Ross initially seems like a blustering blowhard, and to some extent he is, but there’s enough protracted, dissenting point-of-view conversations with Betty that, eventually, his reasoning come across (“I’m sorry Betty. I am so sorry”; “I know you are” she replies, conciliatorily).


Military personage: Angry Man is unsecure.

The tour de force of Hulk, though, the main reason it deserves to be revisited and reappraised, is the third act. Essentially from the point where Bruce (or rather, Hulk) escapes the desert base and goes on an onwards rampage. Indeed, this might be my favourite finale of any superhero adaptation. Not only does Lee’s split screen, De Palma-esque but with comic book presentation in mind, come into its own, but he also creates moments of true visual awe and splendour, the like of which are so rarely given head of steam in the comic book adaptation world. The recent Dr Strange went all out with the trippy factor as Stephen encountered hidden realms, and I really rated that movie, but its rendition of such points was essential very functional, very grounded.


Here, as a giant green man races across the desert floor like an express train, leaping far into the air and eventually coming back down to ground before leaping once again, the imagery carries a wonderfully woozy, dream logic and sense of euphoria, of uncontained release. The “action” of this section is no slouch either, with Hulk throwing tanks about (and, in the humour stakes, bending barrels back to the surprise of a crewman and biting off and spitting out the explosive nose cones of missiles). The far-out culmination of this sequence finds Hulk on a jet ride to top of the world where, finally rendered insensible, he plummets. It’s a magnificent moment.


David Banner: The more you fight the more of you I take.

Hulk’s subsequent fight with his father, who has chowed down on a cable in a moment strangely reminiscent of Joe Don Baker striking together two sticks of plutonium at the end of Edge of Darkness, can’t equal this for dazzle, but it is still appropriately abstract, as Hulk leaps through clouds, his imprint left on each successively as his father fights/illuminates him before coming to land, where the latter mutates into first a rock man and then raging waters. The difficulty Marvel has encountered with their finales is that they feel the need to up the ante in spectacle while generally failing to realise emotional stakes and payoffs are more powerful. Perhaps Hulk put them off, but you just have to compare the mass destruction of The Incredible Hulk’s finale to the more personal struggle here to identify which is streets ahead.


Hulk doesn’t speak in Lee’s movie, except in a dream sequence before Banner is sentenced to execution. Looking in a mirror, Bruce finds his alter ego staring back at him, before the latter reaches a huge mitt through and grabs the scientist, uttering the immortal “Puny human”. As visual metaphors go, it isn’t subtle, but it’s one of the effects sequences here that entirely succeeds, and it neatly sums up the picture to boot. Lee leaves Bruce in the jungles of South America, tossing off lines from the TV show (with a frog on his hat; presumably symbolising he has made some kind of peace with himself, an exploding frog featuring in one of his failed experiments – we should remember that Bruce the scientist is no friend to the animals), and it’s in the jungle that the Ed Norton reboot begins.


James Schamus’ had an idea for a sequel set on a Native American reservation that was “all about radioactivity and it was really political and like, that would have been awesome”. Yeaaassss…. I think we’re probably best with just the one offering from Lee and Schamus, but it’s a shame the deemed lead balloon of experimentation with form here has discouraged further such forays subsequently. I don’t doubt there’ll be more off-kilter superhero movies going forward, but they seem much more likely to come from the DC stable’s throw-everything-against-the-wall-and-see-what-sticks free for all than Marvel’s rigorously conservative approach. For now, then, appreciate Ang Lee’s Hulk for what we got, as we might not see it’s like again for some time.



Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We live in a twilight world.

Tenet (2020)
(SPOILERS) I’ve endured a fair few confusingly-executed action sequences in movies – more than enough, actually – but I don’t think I’ve previously had the odd experience of being on the edge of my seat during one while simultaneously failing to understand its objectives and how those objectives are being attempted. Which happened a few times during Tenet. If I stroll over to the Wiki page and read the plot synopsis, it is fairly explicable (fairly) but as a first dive into this Christopher Nolan film, I frequently found it, if not impenetrable, then most definitely opaque.

She was addicted to Tums for a while.

Marriage Story (2019)
(SPOILERS) I don’t tend to fall heavily for Noah Baumbach fare. He’s undoubtedly a distinctive voice – even if his collaborations with Wes Anderson are the least of that director’s efforts – but his devotion to an exclusive, rarefied New York bubble becomes ever more off-putting with each new project. And ever more identifiable as being a lesser chronicler of the city’s privileged quirks than his now disinherited forbear Woody Allen, who at his peak mastered a balancing act between the insightful, hilarious and self-effacing. Marriage Story finds Baumbach going yet again where Woody went before, this time brushing up against the director’s Ingmar Bergman fixation.

You can’t climb a ladder, no. But you can skip like a goat into a bar.

Juno and the Paycock (1930)
(SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s second sound feature. Such was the lustre of this technological advance that a wordy play was picked. By Sean O’Casey, upon whom Hitchcock based the prophet of doom at the end of The Birds. Juno and the Paycock, set in 1922 during the Irish Civil War, begins as a broad comedy of domestic manners, but by the end has descended into full-blown Greek (or Catholic) tragedy. As such, it’s an uneven but still watchable affair, even if Hitch does nothing to disguise its stage origins.

Anything can happen in Little Storping. Anything at all.

The Avengers 2.22: Murdersville
Brian Clemens' witty take on village life gone bad is one of the highlights of the fifth season. Inspired by Bad Day at Black Rock, one wonders how much Murdersville's premise of unsettling impulses lurking beneath an idyllic surface were set to influence both Straw Dogs and The Wicker Mana few years later (one could also suggest it premeditates the brand of backwoods horrors soon to be found in American cinema from the likes of Wes Craven and Tobe Hooper).

James Bond. You appear with the tedious inevitability of an unloved season.

Moonraker (1979)
Depending upon your disposition, and quite possibly age, Moonraker is either the Bond film that finally jumped the shark or the one that is most gloriously redolent of Roger Moore’s knowing take on the character. Many Bond aficionados will no doubt utter its name with thinly disguised contempt, just as they will extol with gravity how Timothy Dalton represented a masterful return to the core values of the series. If you regard For Your Eyes Only as a refreshing return to basics after the excesses of the previous two entries, and particularly the space opera grandstanding of this one, it’s probably fair to say you don’t much like Roger Moore’s take on Bond.

The protocol actually says that most Tersies will say this has to be a dream.

Jupiter Ascending (2015)
(SPOILERS) The Wachowski siblings’ wildly patchy career continues apace. They bespoiled a great thing with The Matrix sequels (I liked the first, not the second), misfired with Speed Racer (bubble-gum visuals aside, hijinks and comedy ain’t their forte) and recently delivered the Marmite Sense8 for Netflix (I was somewhere in between on it). Their only slam-dunk since The Matrix put them on the movie map is Cloud Atlas, and even that’s a case of rising above its limitations (mostly prosthetic-based). Jupiter Ascending, their latest cinema outing and first stab at space opera, elevates their lesser works by default, however. It manages to be tone deaf in all the areas that count, and sadly fetches up at the bottom of their filmography pile.

This is a case where the roundly damning verdicts have sadly been largely on the ball. What’s most baffling about the picture is that, after a reasonably engaging set-up, it determinedly bores the pants off you. I haven’t enco…

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991)
(SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

My dear, sweet brother Numsie!

The Golden Child (1986)
Post-Beverly Hills Cop, Eddie Murphy could have filmed himself washing the dishes and it would have been a huge hit. Which might not have been a bad idea, since he chose to make this misconceived stinker.

When I barked, I was enormous.

Dean Spanley (2008)
(SPOILERS) There is such a profusion of average, respectable – but immaculately made – British period drama held up for instant adulation, it’s hardly surprising that, when something truly worthy of acclaim comes along, it should be singularly ignored. To be fair, Dean Spanleywas well liked by critics upon its release, but its subsequent impact has proved disappointingly slight. Based on Lord Dunsany’s 1939 novella, My Talks with Dean Spanley, our narrator relates how the titular Dean’s imbibification of a moderate quantity of Imperial Tokay (“too syrupy”, is the conclusion reached by both members of the Fisk family regarding this Hungarian wine) precludes his recollection of a past life as a dog. 

Inevitably, reviews pounced on the chance to reference Dean Spanley as a literal shaggy dog story, so I shall get that out of the way now. While the phrase is more than fitting, it serves to underrepresent how affecting the picture is when it has cause to be, as does any re…