Hulk
Grade:
|
 |
Plot Summary:
Bruce Banner learns about his heritage when a lab accident turns him into a massive green monster. Much smashing ensues...
Opinion:
"Hulk" (not "THE Hulk", remember...) has been the biggest victim of misplaced expectations since "The Phantom Menace" in 1999. The "Star Wars" prequel, you'll remember, earned over $430 million in the US box office--4th all time--yet received scathing criticism from fans who felt it fell way short of what a "Star Wars" movie should be. (Ironically, the exact same movie would probably have received much less criticism if it didn't have "Star Wars" before it's title--although fewer box office dollars perhaps) Similarly, "Hulk" is considered a box-office disappointment--even a 'failure'--because it earned 'only' $132 million in the US (studio executives had expected it to be in the $250-300 range.) Yet, like "Phantom Menace", "Hulk" isn't a bad movie at all--just different than what the general audience was apparently expecting. If you go in with the proper expectations, however--judging "Hulk" for what it is, not what it is not--"Hulk" is well worth seeing.
The story of the Incredible Hulk is unique among other comic book 'superheroes' in that it's sense of good and evil are not as clearly defined. While most superheroes consciously fight evil using their alternate personas, the Hulk--based largely on the story of Dr. Jeckyl and Mr. Hyde--is more of a expression of Bruce Banner's repressed emotional psyche, and if Hulk ends up fighting evil, it's almost by accident. Perhaps one of the reasons people had a hard time getting into "Hulk" the movie, it's because the lines between the good and evil characters aren't as clearly drawn as in other comic book movies. Is the "Hulk" really the 'hero' of the movie? Is General Ross and his army really the 'bad guys'? Yet, the two end up being adversaries for most of the movie. The movie also spends a great amount of time in 'talking' moments--discussion of Bruce's past and emotional state, along with his relationship with Betty and his dad. Hulk himself doesn't make an appearance until 45 minutes into the movie--undoubtedly, much of the audience found the first half of the movie boring. Yet, if you're looking at "Hulk" as a comic book movie with emotional depth and a somewhat gray view of good/evil (instead of cardboard cutout characters with clearly defined "Good Guy" and "Bad Guy" nametags) then you'll find exactly what you're looking for. We already have "Spiderman" and "X-men" for those looking for easier-to-understand comic book movies, why not have a different kind of movie for "Hulk"?
The overall tone of "Hulk" shouldn't really be that much of a surprise given the director is Taiwanese native Ang Lee. Following in Spiderman's footsteps, the "Hulk" producers wanted someone who wasn't one of your standard action directors, but one with more 'independent' film experience. Psychological drama is at the heart of most of Lee's films--even an action oriented one like "
Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon--and "Hulk" is no different. In fact, the whole movie is laid out like a Greek tragedy, and you know it was only by sheer force of will that Lee didn't have the movie ending with Bruce Banner's death (the logical conclusion from the movie's portrayal of Bruce as a typical 'tragic hero'--but you know the studio executives would never have allowed it and removed the possibility for future sequels--and *ahem* more money...)
The downside to the pronounced tragic aspects is that "Hulk" isn't really a 'fun' movie. You won't get the same kind of exhilaration from watching this movie that you would from any of the Spiderman or X-Men movies. Those two series manage to mix deeper material with some comic book fun and humor--whereas Hulk's source material is more dramatic and emotional at its core without a lot of laughs. This isn't necessarily a criticism--it just, as I said, depends on your expectations for the film.
Technically, "Hulk" is near flawless. The Hulk himself, while obviously computer generated, looks really good, even in close shots. Lee and his producers had some great ideas for visual editing effects, simulating comic book panels and a natural flow from page to page which helps keep the film interesting.
Many good movies fail to find their audience in the theaters and maybe "Hulk" is one of those--for those who prefer emotions and depth in movies instead of brainless plotless popcorn munching chaos, give "Hulk" a try.
Content Analysis: (1-2-2-2 on the Baron's scale--light PG-13)
"Hulk" is fairly clean, even by comic-book standards. I counted a couple of swear words, and Bruce has one bare rear-end shot but that's about it. "Hulk" is violent in principle, but not in application. In Hulk's fight against the army, the filmmakers go to great lengths to show that the Hulk doesn't actually kill anyone. After each shot of helicopters or tanks crashing, a brief scene is added on to show that the guys inside are still alive. This is fitting because the army guys aren't really 'bad'--just trying to protect others from the unpredictable Hulk--and having any of them die because of Hulk's actions would turn him into a villain essentially.
In-depth Analysis:
"Hulk" is essentially a story about an emotional repressed man releasing his anger in a unique way. Everyone knows having a short temper is not a Christ-like attribute, but is constantly hiding your emotions inside yourself healthy either? There is such a thing as "righteous anger", of course, and many examples in the scriptures and Church history that demonstrate it--Jesus with the moneychangers in the temple (twice), Moses with the golden calf after coming down from Sinai, Captain Moroni towards the Nephite government, and the jailed Joseph Smith when faced with offensive language from his captors. Even God is referenced many times in the scriptures as having 'anger' towards the wicked. Of course, the line between
righteous anger and
unrighteous anger can be very thin, and naturally mankind has frequently used the above scriptural examples to justify not holding in their own tempers when situations arise of which they disapprove.
Bruce mentions that after letting go of his emotions in the form of the Hulk, he feels better. A common form of therapy involves sharing with others exactly what you think of them--letting out any bitter feelings or grudges you may have held for long periods of time. Holding grudges is certainly damaging, but is the expression of those feelings through anger and hatred towards others any better? What's the 'right' way to express your emotions, even negative ones? The Lord's 'anger' towards the wicked is always tempered by the inviolable laws of justice and mercy. God's 'anger' will not cause him to depart from the plan of salvation, nor will it minimize His forgiveness if one repents. Mankind is not so disciplined--anger towards others frequently leads to emotional rather than rational responses, and tends to ignore both justice and mercy.
The proper attitude is described in the Doctrine & Covenants:
Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou hast reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy; (121:43)
Thus, all instances of righteous anger must be accompanied by love afterwards--never forgetting the eternal worth of a soul and making sure to hate the sin and not the sinner.
Perhaps it is this 'increase in love afterwards' that provides the definition we're looking for between 'righteous' and 'unrighteous' anger. Let's look again at the example mentioned above with Captain Moroni and his letter to the Nephite government (Alma 60,61) Unlike the other examples of 'righteous anger' where the people showing anger were clearly in the right, Captain Moroni only
thinks he was in the right, before being informed of the truth by Pahoran, the Nephite chief judge. Moroni's anger was based on the neglect of his army, but after learning of the real situation, Moroni demonstrated that his love for the Nephite government still existed by not being stubborn and saying "Well...that may be true, but you
still should have..." but offering to help the government fix their problems for the benefit of all.
Random Notes and Comments:
(1) While the origin story is quite a bit different in the movie version (i.e. he's not related to Bruce), the being Hulk faces at the end is based on Absorbing Man, a villain from the comics.
(2) Jennifer Connelly (Betty Ross) might have felt a little deja vu doing this movie, since her role almost exactly meshes two of her previous roles: the girlfriend of a guy with mental and emotional problems from "A Beautiful Mind", and the girlfriend of a comic book superhero in "The Rocketeer".
