I’ll admit it. Proudly. The Monkey and I are among the few who actually liked Ang Lee’s “flawed” 2003 silver screen adaptation of the Marvel Comics behometh super “hero” - the Hulk. I say flawed because it is generally accepted that Lee’s take on the character was a failure in the minds of critics and fans, as well as a “failure” at the box office.

The new film, titled “The Incredible Hulk,” perhaps as an homage to the 1970’s Bill Bixby television show and as a means to distinguish it from the monosyllablic title of Ang Lee’s film, has generally received rather positive reviews, earning a 66% fresh “tomatometer” rating at www.rottentomatoes.com (Ang Lee’s “Hulk” registers at 61% fresh). Many reviewers are lauding the film for delivering more action, sans the “psycho-babble” from the previous entry, in addition to tying neatly into the “Marvel Cinematic Universe” created in the vastly superior film, “Iron Man.”

Marvel Studios

It should be noted that “Iron Man” and “The Incredible Hulk” are the first two features released by Marvel Studios. Previous Marvel superhero adaptations (X-Men, Spiderman, Daredevil) were released by separate studios, with Marvel retaining very little creative control over their properties. In an effort to exert more creative license and to establish a cohesive, interconnected “universe” that mirrors the integrity and continuity of the comics, Marvel started up its own independent movie studio and will be releasing a slate of independently produced films to follow up their first two releases over the coming years. Rumor has it Captain America and The Avengers are next, the latter most likely featuring Iron Man, the Hulk, and Captain America, among others.

The Myth of Ang Lee’s “Hulk” at the Box Office

Ang Lee’s “Hulk” had a larger opening weekend draw than the Ed Norton re-boot, earning $62 million in its opening weekend back in 2003, compared to the “Incredible Hulk” earning $55 million over the weekend of June 13, 2008. Taking inflation into account (and God knows the dollar has lost a few ticks in the past couple of years), the original film’s numbers would likely be even higher by today’s standards, perhaps 10% or more.

To put those opening weekend numbers into perspective, Ang Lee’s “Hulk” currently stands as the #2 all-time opening weekend for any film. Overall, the film earned $245 million worldwide. Hardly a box office failure. With marketing costs factored in, the film likely broke even in theaters, but with residual revenues including video rentals, video game and toy spin-offs, pay-per-view, and cable television licensing fees, there is no doubt that the film was ultimately profitable.

And yet, for the most part a myth persists that Ang Lee’s film was a box office failure. Many critics point to the original film’s second weekend “dropoff,” in which its box office receipts were 70% smaller over the following weekend as an indication of its financial failure. While this number is huge, remember that a 70% decline translates into a nearly $20 million dollar subsequent weekend, which isn’t horrible as far as popcorn movies are concerned. The “Incredible Hulk,” which is supposedly the superior and more successful film, dropped off over 61% in its second weekend, cashing in a little over $20 million in the box office, which is a comparable drop off to the original film.

7 REASONS WHY: “Hulk” is Better Than “The Incredible Hulk”

Beyond the box office numbers, HULK is actually a superior film to THE INCREDIBLE HULK for the following reasons:

1) Sam Elliott Makes William Hurt Look Like Private Pyle as General Ross. Having spent time one-on-one with both of these actors I can say without reservation that Sam Elliott is a much more convincing military man than William Hurt. I worked with Elliott on Mel Gibson’s “We Were Soldiers” and this guy seems to have soldiering in his DNA. He served in the military many years ago and has the strength, gruffness, and single-mindedness that makes him incredibly convincing whenever he dons a uniform onscreen. Hurt, on the other hand, doesn’t have a military bone in his body. I enjoyed spending time talking with Hurt on the set of “The Village” (he called me “The Captain,” as a nod to my former military rank), and I can honestly say that he is the furthest thing from a military man, which he exudes during his performance in the new film. There is an unmistakable softness to him that acting skill alone can’t transcend. Granted, he had a pretty weak script to work with, but he couldn’t shine the jump boots of Elliott’s General Ross.

2) The Hulk is a West Coast Character. In the comics, the Hulk spends a lot of time bouncing around the desert and America’s West Coast. The first film captured this essence masterfully as a true homage to the comics that inspired the film. In the new film, the Hulk finds his way to New York City, just to give the filmmakers an excuse to stage a boring battle with the Abomination on the streets of Manhattan, like just about every other disaster flick with a penchant for destroying the Big Apple.

3) Ang Lee Created a “Movie Comic.” One of the coolest things about the original Hulk was Ang Lee’s attempt to craft an onscreen comic book, using panels, split screens, and intersting transitions that honored the protagonist’s pulp past, while simulaneously enriching the film’s genre with new story-telling techniques that weren’t merely artifice.

4) Louis Leterrier is No Ang Lee. The fact that Marvel Studios contracted a B-movie hack to helm the picture indicates their unwillingness to allow healthy creativity and reinterpretation of the Hulk property. Leterrier’s resume includes the forgettable Transporter series as well as the Jet Li project, “Unleashed.” Clearly he’s a guy who knows how to stage fight and action sequences and little else. Undoubtedly Oscar-winning Ang Lee had too much brains, skill, and subtlety to film a comic book adaptation.

5) The Incredible Hulk Has No Overarching Theme. Theme is one of the most important aspects of filmic story telling. Theme answers the essential question of what the movie is about, or what it is trying to say beyond the mere plot.

For example, one could say one of the themes of Ang Lee’s picture was anger. How anger can destroy, create, protect, kill, enliven, confound, complicate, envigorate, and ultimately heal.

On a secondary level, Lee’s Hulk also explored an aspect of the timeless Oedipal struggle, of how the son is constantly in struggle against the father and how that struggle shapes men into who they are. To a lesser degree, this struggle was also played out between Sam Elliott’s General Ross and his wayward and lovelost daughter Betty (Jennifer Connelly), who had fallen for the Hulk’s alter ego (Bruce Banner) creating all sorts of complications.

In contrast, “The Incredible Hulk” is about nothing, as far as I can tell. Ed Norton’s Banner only wants to control and destroy the Hulk, while Eric Bana’s Banner was disgusted yet simultaneously intoxicated by his Hulk. Bana’s Banner admitted liking the feeling of power and the exorcism of anger that occurred when he transformed into the Hulk. In this way, his transformation into the Hulk was a metaphor for the anger and destructiveness we humans experience from time to time. Herein lies the brilliance of Lee’s film. Norton’s relationship with the Hulk was disconnected and pointed no where. He simply spent the bulk of the film hiding from his Hulk and simply used it as a tool at the end of the film, as it was the only force capable of contending with Tim Roth’s Abomination (of a performance).

6) Ed Norton’s Banner Can’t Hold Eric Bana’s Banner’s Testube. Try saying that 10 times fast.

Apparently a prerequisite to play the role of Bruce Banner is to have played a neo-Nazi in a previous independent film (Norton: American History X; Bana: Chopper). I wonder what’s in the late Bill Bixby’s past?

I’m one of the few peeps out there who thinks Mr. Norton is a tad overrated. That he has received additional kudos for helping to write this script under a pseudonym (Edward Harrison) goes to show the cinegeek bias towards this fella.  (NOTE: to Norton’s credit, he got into a bit of a row with Marvel concerning his take on the film, which you can read about here).  Bottom line, it felt as though Norton brought nothing to the table in this performance. Nothing hidden, nothing tying him in knots (other than the fact that he has an 8-foot green alter ego). Since the producers were adamant about discarding everything about the previous film, in essence creating a fresh “reboot,” we know nothing about his past or his backstory. And it is backstory that informs the actor when he is in the moment. Hence the pointlessness of Norton’s interpretation of the character.

Bana, on the hand, brought a tortured Bruce Banner to the screen. First of all, he had a psychopathic borderline sadist for a dad (Nick Nolte). This relationship exists beneath the surface of every one of Bana’s scenes. If he weren’t the Hulk, he would still barely be able to contain the rage he feels towards his wayward father. The fact that he is the Hulk is what makes this dilemma interesting.

7. Tim Roth: An Abominable Abomination. Tim Roth is a fine actor. A one-note actor, but a fine one nonetheless. But a crack Special Forces soldier? I think not. Now I know the producers of “The Incredible Hulk” weren’t so keen on nailing technical accuracy in terms of their portrayal of military men in the film, but casting a stubby unshaven British guy in the role of rough and tumble Special Forces officer defies our willing suspension of disbelief. Having met and worked with many Special Ops soldiers over my military career, several adjectives commonly come to mind to describe them: big, thick, mean, badass. Unfortunately none of those words could be used to describe little Mr. Roth. His alter ego - the Abomination - isn’t really worth discussing here, other than to say that his much-anticipated matchup with the Hulk is underwhelming to say the least.

Oh, by the way, if you’re looking for accurate onscreen representation of a Special Ops soldier, look no further than Black Hawk Down and check out a great performance by an actor we might have mentioned somewhere in this post…Eric Bana.