The Energon Pub

News Credits: 3 · by **Archanubis** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 8:56 pm

Found saw this while browsing TV.com, found a YouTube link:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Ia3uPDuojmU

This one actually looks worth watching.

Yahoo movies also has a higher res and also HD versions of the trailer.

http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1808495230/video/6965543

by **Outrider2000** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:01 pm

Looks a ton better than the Ang Lee version.

Heres hoping it will be ...

News Credits: 38 · by **TheMuffin** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 11:23 pm

I've watched it in HD on yahoo! movies about 10 times now. This little two minute trailer was better than that whole 2.5 hour Brokeback Hulk crap that Ang Lee gave us. Guess what? I don't give two shits that Bruce had a tragic past when he was a kid. I just want to see the Hulk beat bad guys up. And with the cast they have in this one, I don't see it being screwed up too badly.

by **Evil_the_Nub** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 11:28 pm

Looks like they're taking the spider-man approach and making it 5% superhero and 95% secret identity.

News Credits: 38 · by **TheMuffin** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 11:48 pm

How do you figure? Rumors abound that he Hulks out within the first 5 minutes of the movie. And Bruce Banner falling from a freaking Helicopter and turning into the Hulk in front of everyone is none to subtle.

News Credits: 1 · by **Venomous Prime** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 1:25 am

the last shot of Hulk and Abomination running at each other is drool worthy.

in fact...

=P~

by **Outrider2000** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 3:12 am

I think its just the trailer where its 5 percent super hero... its a teaser waiting to see the Hulk.

News Credits: 49 · by **Senor Hugo** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 8:02 am

I thought that the Ang Lee version of Hulk was pretty good. It had some nice scene transitions, and instead of the usual "Hulk Smash" bit we get with every comic, it took a more Bruce Banner coping with the crap he has to deal with side. Which was nice for a change.

But now that the first movie is done and over with, every other movies needs to be 80% Hulk Smash, 10% Banner Emo, and 10% Liv Tyler in skimpy outfits.

Also, I'm so glad to see Robert Downey Jr listed as Tony Stark in the credits, now all we need is another performance of Sam Jackson as Nick Fury in the film, and this will be the second perfect Marvel movie to come out.

The first being the soon to be released Iron Man.

by **AlienQuiksilver** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 8:03 am

Effing Ed Norton! I had no idea. Great actor ... simply awesome.

News Credits: 1 · by **Scatterlung** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 8:23 am

Edward Norton...

"There are aspects of my personality that I can't control".

How. Fitting.

I didn't watch the first one, is this a sequel or a very premature reboot?

by **Outrider2000** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 9:02 am

Meverix wrote:Edward Norton...

"There are aspects of my personality that I can't control".

How. Fitting.

I didn't watch the first one, is this a sequel or a very premature reboot?

from what i understand, its a complete reboot. it seems like there was a good deal of backlash on the first one, so they are just kind of starting the whole thing over.

by **AlienQuiksilver** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 5:50 pm

I enjoyed the first one, not gonna lie. I mean ... still, it's not what the Hulk should have been.

Glad they are ignoring its existance ... just like Superman Returns pretty much picks up after Superman 2, totally ignoring 3 and 4.

Maybe one day they will get Daredevil, Ghost Rider and Spawn done correctly?

It's tough to completely ruin a movie that's based on a comic book character. I mean, the fact that the movie exists is enough to make me happy.

Scratch that, Aflack sucked really bad as Matt Murdock! The Elektra spinoff was better, and that's not saying much.

News Credits: 38 · by **TheMuffin** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 6:47 pm

Watch the directors cut of Daredevil.

by **Outrider2000** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 8:02 pm

TheMuffin wrote:Watch the directors cut of Daredevil.

I own it :0 about 100 times better than the original version IMO.

News Credits: 26 · by **Wheeljack35** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 10:40 pm

It looks much better then the last one

So far it looked as if it parts of the comic story and the TV version with Lou Ferrigno

Liv Tyler is as cute as usual

by **Outrider2000** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 10:45 pm

I also noticed while watching it again that the Hulk looks more scaled down and old school, like in the comics.

still does not look nearly as good as Iron Man...but should be good (I hope)

by **Nightracer GT** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 2:24 am

It looks good, but honestly:

I like the Ang Lee version. I like the "Bruce Banner Emo". That movie kept me glued and I was all keyed up and tense for the whole night afterwards.

This movie just looks like contrived set up for Hulk Smash. It better have a good story.

I know. I know. I've got the wrong attitude already, wanting story in a Hulk movie.

But if they're making a movie based on a successful franchise, then there must have been good stories in the beginning. So therefore, yes, I want a good story in the new Hulk movie.

The Ang Lee version had that. Maybe too much, but I liked it.

Why is it that whenever something goes into depth about character problems and backstory, it's "emo?" What's good drama vs "Emo"?

News Credits: 38 · by **TheMuffin** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 11:55 am

There is good drama. And then there is an hour and a half of "I hate my daddy for what he did" emo crap.

And man what a good villain his dad was. Mr. 'I can turn into water and such' man. How boring. At least this one has an actual Hulk baddie in it.

by **Megatron-Ron** » Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:37 am

I saw this trailer the night it came out online, This movie could define marvel comic movies. Cant wait for this one.

by **Nightracer GT** » Tue Mar 18, 2008 6:58 am

TheMuffin wrote:There is good drama. And then there is an hour and a half of "I hate my daddy for what he did" emo crap.

But that's exactly what I'm asking you. It is possible to have anger towards your father. I have it.

Therefore, it has to be possible to do good drama about that. So what's the difference between that good drama, and "emo crap".

Is it because it's in a Hulk movie? Is that destroying any good drama there may have been?

It's possible to do both. X Men effectively used the Holocaust to define Magneto as a character. It wasn't Schindler's List, but it was an effective scene for what it was.

Is that emo as well? Does it have to be actual Schindler's List before any emotion at all is taken seriously?

Do we have to limit action movies to strict "light drama heavy humor" policies?

Empire Strikes Back, X Men, and Terminator 2 are all examples of pure fantasy that use heavy handed subject matter almost perfectly.

Empire: An idealistic young man, trying only to help people, learns that his father is none other than the most hated man in the galaxy, responsible for trillions of innocent deaths.

Over the top? Of course. Two extremes. Emo? Well it is one of the most famous lines in Hollywood history, and people do not laugh at it, only with it.

X-Men: A misguided man sets out to cleanse humanity because he had his parent taken away from him by people who were also trying to cleanse humanity. And it's also about a group of people hated by society, trying to protect that society.

Over the top? Of course. Too much irony. Emo? No, because it is done without overacting, and the sheer gravity of the situation is left to the imagination.

Terminator 2: A delinquent kid who never had a dad finds a father figure in something that is exactly the opposite of a father figure. And together, they prevent the end of all life as we know it.

Over the top? There's not a scarecrow in existence that could protect all that corn. Emo? No, because it has just as much action and explosions as it has sentimentality, so therefore its balanced out.

So there you have it. 3 movies that has completely over the top melodrama, and yet they work because of the writing or balance with action.

So where, exactly, did Hulk go wrong? What's the real difference between good drama and "emo crap"?

News Credits: 38 · by **TheMuffin** » Tue Mar 18, 2008 7:36 am

The fact that it's in a Hulk movie. Give me a halfway decent story and then unleash the fella on the world. I personally don't need a back story beyond "I got hit by gamma radiation" when explaining the Hulk. In the comics, the drama came from him trying to control the Hulk, not from what his dad did to him when he was 5. Now don't get me wrong, I don't have a problem with changing the basic story and adding in his dad experimenting on him. What I did have a problem with was the fact that it took up almost an hour and forty five minutes of the first movie. You see the Hulk in his own movie for a total of 16 minutes. How sad is that?

So that is why it bugged me in the first movie. I don't need to see the same damn flashback 20 times in a movie before I get what is going on. His dad injected him with **** and his dad killed his mother. WE GOT THAT IN THE FIRST 20 MINUTES ANG LEE!

Now this movie seems (from what little we've seen) to have gotten it right. You can see that it centers around him just trying to control/eliminate it. Read any original comic from the Hulk and you'll see that is the basic story. It works, so go with it.

by **WarHorse** » Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:52 am

AlienQuiksilver wrote:Effing Ed Norton! I had no idea. Great actor ... simply awesome.

I agree. Has he ever been bad in a movie? Not that I know of. I can't even think of a bad movie he was in and even if he was in a bad move, he probably gave the best performance.

I'm way behind here and I've never been a big Hulk fan but now I'm really excited for this movie. :APPLAUSE:

by **Nightracer GT** » Thu Mar 20, 2008 5:54 am

TheMuffin wrote:The fact that it's in a Hulk movie. Give me a halfway decent story and then unleash the fella on the world. I personally don't need a back story beyond "I got hit by gamma radiation" when explaining the Hulk. In the comics, the drama came from him trying to control the Hulk, not from what his dad did to him when he was 5. Now don't get me wrong, I don't have a problem with changing the basic story and adding in his dad experimenting on him. What I did have a problem with was the fact that it took up almost an hour and forty five minutes of the first movie. You see the Hulk in his own movie for a total of 16 minutes. How sad is that?

So that is why it bugged me in the first movie. I don't need to see the same damn flashback 20 times in a movie before I get what is going on. His dad injected him with **** and his dad killed his mother. WE GOT THAT IN THE FIRST 20 MINUTES ANG LEE!

Now this movie seems (from what little we've seen) to have gotten it right. You can see that it centers around him just trying to control/eliminate it. Read any original comic from the Hulk and you'll see that is the basic story. It works, so go with it.

Okay, hats off to you. You make a very strong case.

That was literally the first time in my life I've heard a good explanation for why Hulk is a bad movie. Everyone else I talk to about it just says "It just sucked" and couldn't describe why for the life of them. The reason I asked them to describe why? Because I was one of two people I knew who liked it, and I really wanted to know what I wasn't understanding.

And now I do.

EDIT: I watched it again, and while I completely agree that there is too much schmaltzy sentimentality, I was also noting where cuts could be made, and I still believe that with about 30 minutes trimmed, maybe 20, it would be a good movie.

Oh well...

by **Defcon!** » Thu Mar 20, 2008 9:09 pm

This is the first time i've seen the trailer and i must say i like it already! They have a classic Hulk villian in it and i like how they made the Hulk somewhat of a hero instead of a dog that needs to be put down. The only gripe i have is he looks similar to the first Hulk and i would rather him have that more monstrous face instead of the human one. Not that the first one was bad just the face. The first movie i did'nt mind but it's good to have him fight an actuall villian instead of some mutated dogs!

News Credits: 38 · by **TheMuffin** » Fri Mar 21, 2008 6:14 am

Dark Zarak wrote:EDIT: I watched it again, and while I completely agree that there is too much schmaltzy sentimentality, I was also noting where cuts could be made, and I still believe that with about 30 minutes trimmed, maybe 20, it would be a good movie.

Oh well...

I think that would make it more than tolerable.