The Incredible Hulk

A pretty decent sequel that does Marvel no shame. The action scenes are perfectly executed and edited, and Louis Leterrier doesn't spare them, leaving the viewer not much time to think. There can be no complaints about the actors either, Edward Norton is as reliable as ever, Tim Roth handles bad guys like few others and Liv Tyler is really just there for decoration and a necessary romantic motif. But all this clashes with the insanely B-movie content, which has more clichés than a German romantic film where two lovers declare their love on a breathtaking seashore. The Incredible Hulk has no chance of becoming a classic like Raimi's Spider-Man, but it works more than well as an unpretentious comic book flick – and sometimes that's enough. 70% (12/11/2012)

I still don’ t understand why there made an incomprehensible remake of a fairly new movie when it was already clear in advance that it would turn out more or less the same. Hulk doesn't have a good story and doesn't have that potential, he’s too serious and dramatic for a comic book hero. Technically, it's the same as with the previous film: impressive overall, but unfinished in the details. Tim Roth adds the necessary spice to it, Liv Tyler is an ornament (classic), and Edward Norton with his worried face also doesn't interest much. At least the opening credits made a proper “upgrade” and, with it’s solid orchestral accompaniment, it is one of the few captivating things you will see in the movie. (28/09/2008)

From an antique tragedy interspersed with Marvel action, it went a few steps down. And it remained standing in a contradictory mezzanine. Five years after Lee's vision, which was received rather hesitantly, it is no wonder that we are supposed to forget about it from the very beginning. I could see it a hundred times, but I give up because I know I am in the clear minority. However, Leterrier is so excited about the previously overlooked Hulk-smash that he doesn't care much about character depth or traumatic inserts, and the Brazilian introduction even annoys him. As for the central characters and their performers, I have to frown a bit as well, because Betty is nothing more than a lovely catalyst for Banner's emotions this time, and Norton's portrayal of the titular hero is occasionally disappointingly shallow. So why the high rating in the end? Because any action scene is an explosive, impressive spectacle that takes your breath away, and Blonsky aka Abomination boldly joins the gallery of marvel villains cursed in the future, to whom I regularly have a weakness. The decisive factor for the fourth star is that this version of Hulk works solely and exclusively as bait for the Avengers. Yes, Iron Man, Thor, and Captain America are a class or two better, leaving Bruce as a small green one behind, but from a rather inconspicuous superhero side game, he gradually matured into a pleasant bite-sized snack. Note: The translation has been slightly modified for better readability. (27/10/2008)

Of all the Marvel movies, I found The Incredible Hulk to be the least entertaining and action-packed, and as far as the story goes, it was rather shallow, plus I never found the character of Bruce Banner to be very likeable (whoever played him). Also, compared to other Marvel movies, it lacked some of the quirks and maybe even a plot twist, but it's true that it was one of the first cinematic notches in this universe. And I have to admit that I'm quite glad that Mark Ruffalo appears as the Hulk in the following films, as he fits the role better than Edward Norton, even though this character is my least favorite anyway. In short, a mediocre action movie about a "green bruiser" that just flows by and has nothing to surprise. (29/06/2016)

Compared to Lee's Hulk, this one is filmed without a shred of an idea. The story unfolds in the style of "action - boredom - more action - boredom - a bit of suspense before the ending - boredom - final overstuffed mega-action". Of all the characters, I liked the villain Blonsky the most (I can take Tim Roth anywhere, anytime, especially when he plays a madman), and that probably wasn't the intention either. Letterier wants to impress mainly with the digital effects, but they are not very good, and at the end he piles so many on top of each other that it's unbearable, the unsympathetic Edward Norton has one facial expression throughout the film and Liv Tyler has two. But above all, it is sorely lacking in perspective! Everything is presented with such awkward seriousness... It was simply terrible. (09/09/2009)