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)

Early on, Leterrier blows Lee’s work away during the opening credits, but that's where the positives in relation to the previous film end. That there are only three action scenes in two hours doesn’t bother me so much given that even without the Hulk's fights with the army, there is still something going on and it's solidly paced. However, Leterrier's forte is contact fights in an arena or in mafia dens. In the bigger scenes, he desperately steals wherever he can think of, meaning that the opening is "Bourne Morocco," the university ambush replicates Ang's tanks from the desert, and the ending is all about CGI battles. The rest is horribly sterile so that the fated love fizzles out and the viewer shakes his head sadly. But I’m quite curious to see if the team offered at the end will really actually happen. (19/09/2008)

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)

Ang Lee wasn't far from the truth, but unfortunately, his Hulk came at a time that hadn't yet reckoned with the macho MCU. The Incredible Hulk of the new generation is the latest take on the classic Beauty and the Beast myth, Frankenstein's Monster, the Monster of the Black Lagoon, Swamp Thing, and more. However, I am pleased to acknowledge that, in terms of the acting, Hulk features very decent performances from Edward Norton and Liv Tyler, though the whole thing could be considered merely as "trying" - and, in retrospect, just a straight-up Marvel movie. Bruce and Betty's romance is truly life-like and their shared intimacy is very realistic. The MCU has lost a lot by losing this duo. (01/03/2015)

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)