Underappreciated #1 The Incredible Hulk
“This summer, our only hope is something incredible”
After the blinding success of Iron Man and The Dark Knight (only the fourth film to break the billion-dollar mark let us not forget) in the summer of 2008, there did not seem to be any attention or love left for the big green guy arriving late on in the summer. Financially it did fine, but the critical reception was lukewarm at best.
Now, this may be in part to the fact that in 2003 there was another Hulk film (you may have heard of it) called simply “Hulk” – see, ours is already better (it has a better name). People may have been confused – is it a sequel? – or simply bored – seen it all before. But more than that, it was rubbish. You can talk all day about the quality of Eric Bana’s performance or Ang Lee’s composition quality (it looks just like comic book panels apparently), but it is criminally, unforgivably dull.
And people at the time were not afraid to acknowledge this. Lisa Schwarzbaum of Entertainment Weekly stated, “a big-budget comic-book adaptation has rarely felt so humourless and intellectually defensive about its own pulpy roots” and this just about sums it up for me. Batman (recently) is massively dark but it gets around the problem by being completely badass. I’d love to intellectualise it more, but The Dark Knight, especially, rocks in a way that a big green guy smashing shit up really should, but somehow fails to.
But then something happened with the 2008 “re-boot” (not a good phrase, but you can’t really class it as a sequel). Suddenly, having a Hulk with humour and action (one that rocks a bit, basically) wasn’t good enough anymore. Oh no, we liked the old boring one. Honest. “The Incredible Hulk” is no doubt an ideal version of the Hulk saga for those who found Ang Lee’s “Hulk” too talky, or dare I say, too thoughtful says Roger Ebert in one of his snottier sentences in a review that basically compares the two instead of reviewing the new one.
The Incredible Hulk gave everyone a chance to try and look clever and a hell of a lot of people took that chance. “Hollywood dumbing down again; just typical!” was the common response. If the new Hulk was a KFC, the previous version was Coq au Vin and only the right kind of people could appreciate it. Well, I disagree.
Hulk 2003 – the trailer had Eric Bana snarling “You wouldn’t like me when I’m angry” – one of the classic superhero (I know the Hulk isn’t really a superhero, but you get the idea) catchphrases. It was cut from the final film. They were embarrassed by the history of the character.
The Incredible Hulk 2008 – Bruce Banner, struggling with his newly acquired Spanish linguistic skills tells the men threatening him: “Don’t make me hungry. You would like me when I’m hungry”. I know which I prefer.
Personally, I love Edward Norton so I always going to prefer him in the role of Bruce Banner. Eric Bana was perfectly fine too, but he’s never been in Fight Club so balls to him. Norton is always good at playing clever people (as he’s pretty smart himself), but he doesn’t often get to play nice, decent people and this is what I really enjoyed about his performance. He is convincing as a smart (too smart) young scientist who doesn’t realise just how close to the flame his hand is getting until it’s too late and his Frankenstein’s Monster is unleashed within himself. He wasn’t trying to hurt anyone, but his genius-sized brain was simply more active than his common sense and the punishment he now receives (from the government he was trying to assist) far outweighs any crime he commits.
I stated before that it’s not a sequel and it’s not, but I would’ve quite liked Sam Elliott and Jennifer Connelly to reprise their roles as General ‘Thunder’ Ross and Betty Ross, if only to provide some continuity with a prior film only five years old. Maybe a clean break was best for all though and Liv Tyler is undeniably lovely as Betty. William Hurt, too, is entertainingly fierce as the General, especially when telling Bruce, “if you’ve taken it from me, I’ll put you in a hole for the rest of your life”. This is one of my favourite moments in the film. Hurt is very much in the middle of a second wind, jump-started not least by his Oscar-nominated ‘A History of Violence’ turn and he’s just fine in the role of bad man who believes he’s doing good.
The film really excels in the introduction of The Abomination, however, and this is where it improves vastly on its predecessor. The first film didn’t know who to fight against. Hulk is the good guy, obviously, but not really. He smashes things up and doesn’t really help people. The army is the villain, but Hulk could crush them with his little toe, so this doesn’t really work dramatically. Hulk 2003 falls into a dramatic black hole having Hulk fight something like, er; his father, (who gave Bruce his Hulk-ness accidently) now super-powered by electricity wants to be the Hulk, but Bruce won’t let him so they fight and then get blown up by the army’s gamma bomb…or do they? My explanation makes far more sense than the film itself.
Hulk 2008 keeps things far clearer and more satisfying. Banner is on the run (like in the TV show) and trying to keep out of everyone’s way and off the radar. The army make a major balls-up by creating The Abomination and so Hulk is needed to save the day, as the only thing that stands a chance against something worse (and bigger) than himself. This is far better.
This final mash-up is a thing of wonder (like super-sized Spiderman versus Doctor Octopus) and comes after several excellent action set pieces (turning the college campus into a battle field is probably my own favourite with Tim Roth running round like a Duracell bunny) and lots of well-handled humour and cute touches in the rest of the running time. This is best exemplified in Betty and Bruce’s re-growing affection whilst on the run, and not least in their abortive attempt at sex.
Maybe it never stood a chance. In an excellent summer for comic books and coming so soon after an unloved ‘prequel’, The Incredible Hulk was possibly always destined for a reaction of ‘meh’. Its reputation may be restored with the growth of the Avengers franchise. But, before that, look again and you’ll see a film with more heart than Iron Man, one that is more nimble on its feet than The Dark Knight and one that is certainly better-suited to the material than Hulk 2003. Try it. You might like it when he’s angry.
Le Grande Finale
I’ve recently finished the final episode of The Shield and I realised how rare it is far me to see a show (any show, not just ones as wonderful as this) from start to finish. I can list a good few that dropped by the wayside, through either my fault or theirs (The Practice, Nip/Tuck, The X-files), despite a good start to the love affair and countless more that didn’t even have a good start. I’ve recently blasted through a couple of great shows that were cut down in their prime (Arrested Development, Deadwood) and they didn’t get to tell their stories in full. Either way, the point is investing in a loved show over time often doesn’t reward the loyal viewer. Ask Seinfeld fans.
Having time to fully reflect on The Shield 75-minute extravaganza, I can honestly say it’s the best, most satisfying and complete finish to a series I’ve personally experienced. Seven years and 88 episodes is a lot to condense into a finale, but the strength of the Shield is that every that happened since that opening episode felt like it was a result, a consequence and an escalation of that. Yes, we had a Glenn Close season and a Forest Whitaker season, but other than that, it was one of the hardest shows on TV to pin to a season if you saw an episode out of context. The entire events of the show were meant to have taken place within the space of about 3 years.
What this meant was that the characters who had started the show all those years ago finished it too. We took the journey with them and their victories and defeats, compromises and terrible decisions, were all the sweeter because of the time we had spent in their company. Compare and contrast with NYPD Blue, which by the time of season 12, had surrounded Andy Sipowicz with a gang of newbies, no-marks and whats-his-names. It was no wonder that the finale did not have a real impact, what with all the tearful goodbyes and good wishes being given and received by characters who’d only been around two minutes in the scheme of things. I should point out that I only joined Blue around season 5, but screw it, I was still a fan for a good long while.
A similar problem of cast changes affected The West Wing, although not to the same extent at all. By the end of season 7, the cast was vast (yes, it rhymes) and while it was still a very, very good show at this stage, it wasn’t the stomach-ache-inducing genius of those first four years. Genius is an overused word (especially on my part), but in television I would unhesitatingly put forward the names of Aaron Sorkin and David Chase. Anyway, the gang which began The West Wing (and was the real thrust of the show) by the end of the series were all either awaiting prison, retired, unemployed or working for the new President. It wasn’t a terrible ending by any means, and “The Last Hurrah” and “Institutional Memory” are two of my favourite episodes of ‘Wing’. It’s just that the finale “Tomorrow” seemed to be 45 minutes of people saying goodbye to one another. It might well have reflected the downbeat mood of a presidential transition, but I refuse to believe Sorkin would have ended the show this way. There would have been a mood of victory, a celebration of the Bartlet years and all that was still to come. I guess, really, I wanted (and still want) a conclusion to the early years and what I got was a conclusion to the later years.
And then we come to the Sopranos – the most debated finale on TV ever (?) and the final part of my ‘trinity’ (as I like to call it), alongside The Shield and The West Wing. Suffice to say, it was a fantastic episode of television to rank by all the other fantastic episodes they gave us over the years. But…
…they’ll always be a “but”, because of that cut-to-black. Always a question mark. Was it great? Was it a cheat? Do you love it? Do you hate it? Do you only think you love it because you’re a Sopranos fan and you’d eat their shit off cream crackers if that’s what they asked you to do?
There’s no real answer, but my view is that endings can become too important to people and too over-analysed in regard to TV and books and films. Yes, I know I’m writing about them, but bear with me. When I think of The Sopranos I think of Richie Aprille and Ralph Cifarretto and banging Russian hookers and hanging out in the Bing. Those few seconds of “what the…?” can’t cancel out years of wonderful entertainment. What were the other seasons? Filler before the finale? And the way my heart raced and my knuckles whitened as the family sat in the diner listening to Journey while Meadow attempted to parallel park was reward enough. How many shows can make you feel like that? And isn’t that why we watch TV; to be transported utterly and have our thoughts and feelings expertly manipulated to either comedy or tragedy?
The Shield had a wonderful finale and for that I’ll always be grateful. A fantastic end to a fantastic story, told with verve and passion. However, the real deal is the journey we took with those characters and the fun and tears we had along the way. Yeah, we’ll never get to hang out in the Barn again, but wasn’t it great while it lasted? The Shield ended as it began, which for me was many years ago on a little portable in my old box-room, late at night on channel 5 when I knew I’d found something special.
Vote Ledger
I, for one, hope that Heath Ledger is nominated for and wins the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor next March. He’s been nommed for the Golden Globe and that’s a step in the right direction, but the Globes are generally more populist and eager to notice things beyond the usual award fodder. Now it’s easy to be snobbish and claim that this is a superhero film, a blockbuster, not a ‘proper’ film, but let’s look deeper.
For a start, what is a ‘proper’ film? Can only ‘Schindler’s List’ or ‘The Piano’, etc, qualify as being worthy of being awarded trophies for achievement in movie-making? The Dark Knight can stand next to virtually any film as an outstanding example of writing, directing and acting, not to mention the more technical aspects which action films generally have to excel at. Ledger is monumental here, a towering performance which could be the breakthrough that comic-book films need to be ‘legitimised’. Look back to last year. Javier Bardem won the supporting award for ‘No Country for Old Men’, playing a psychopathic killer on a rampage, with no conscience, doubt or mercy. Sound familiar? Ah, but you can win awards if you star in a Coen Brothers film. They are legitimate. They are award-worthy. I, personally, don’t think ‘No Country…’ has a particular message, a meaning or a point to it all. I have no idea what it’s about; it’s just a cracking good story and I respond to it. Arguably, the Dark Knight has more to say about the world we live in and the debate about how to fight terrorism/anti-social elements/scum, without losing your soul/decency and all that is worthwhile about the society you are trying to protect. How do you stop someone who isn’t afraid of death and just wants to destroy peace and stability?
Spiderman and X-Men (and their superior part 2’s), followed by Batman Begins and now Iron Man have lead the charge of comic books becoming the predominant action blockbusters of the decade only because they are good. If the 80s was the ‘one-man army’ decade (Arnie, Sly, Bruce) and the 90s were all disaster films (Independence Day, Armageddon, Godzilla), the 00’s surely belong to the comic books. This is largely because they have been given to great directors with passion and ideas who have cast good actors (i.e. not Vin Diesel) and they have blown away the competition. Yes, there are still weak superhero films and they are definitely weak blockbusters released every year (so-called event movies, which are no longer really events and are forgotten so soon – I am Legend, The Day After Tomorrow, The Mummy films and anything starring The Rock can all stand up – God knows what else I’ve forgotten; I guess that’s the point). The Dark Knight is merely the pinnacle of these films so far and I pity anyone trying to follow it.
Titanic and Lord of the Rings managed to be both massive box office hits and massive Oscar winners. So did The Silence of the Lambs. The Godfather was the biggest box office hit of all-time (at the time) before it was an Oscar-plated classic. The Fugitive was nominated for Best Picture and it’s a classic Hollywood action thriller.
These are the exceptions. Hollywood, bizarrely, would often choose to ignore its own kind and reward the tiny indie film with a message and only 11 viewers. If that happens to be the best movie of the year, so be it, God bless. But sometimes, just sometimes, the biopic of the black musician who has struggled against oppression and disadvantage might be quite a straightforward, unexceptional example of movie-making and the man with the cape and rubber mask might be starring in the best, most visceral, exciting and thought-provoking thing out there.
I don’t expect a Best Picture nomination, or Best Director (richly deserved though they would be), and things won’t change overnight. Forrest Gump beats Pulp Fiction after all. And why is that exactly? Is Gump more ‘important’ because it mentions Vietnam and Watergate? It isn’t saying anything about those things, or saying much about anything at all really, anymore than Pulp Fiction is really ‘about’ anything. Few would argue now that Gump is the better film. Pulp Fiction may be style over substance, but my god, what style. And sometimes style, on its own, is enough. Or at least it should be every once in a while.
If Ledger does win, the debate will continue. Snobs will say it makes a mockery of awards for excellence in film to reward a comic book movie. Some will say it’s only because he died so young and so tragically. But let’s forget that for one moment and just appreciate a wonderful performance by an exceptional actor. Truly the ‘best performance by an actor in a supporting role’ this year. And, do you wanna know where he got those scars…?
