jamalio9

An awesome achievement in master story telling (thanks to Ang Lee) and state of the art SFX, the Hulk is easily the most satisfying movie this summer. The pacing is far better than Matrix Reloaded's jumbled mess of combing scenes that don't belong in the same movie, and even the still great X2 that has a habit of starting then stalling with great action set pieces, then long stretches of character exposition, and making the mistake of having the best action scene at the very start of the movie, with not much afterwards to live up to it. I don't understand it when people say the Hulk, compared to X2 (which admittedly had more humour) takes itself too seriously, and Lee is not ashamed to blow up the screen and show us some truly amazing action/FX shots, whereas Brian Singer seems as though he wants to focus more on the themes and issues of being a mutant, rather than the capabilities these mutants have of kicking some serious butt. And also the rather zealous approach of wanting to make it into a huge series, when we know that round 4 or 5, no ones gonna care (apart from the comic book geeks).

Forget Daredevils' tacky direction, as I forgot I saw the damn thing, and I cant actually remember seeing any more big budget fare so far this year, and lets focus on the hulk. Slowly and steadily building up the tension and stretching the exposition, whilst simultaneously revelling in the master editing techniques (include swipes, split screens, CGI zoom ins and so on, recalling the style of a comic book, truly genius) the film at this point, unlike many others in the genre, hardly has a weak scene. Ok, so at the very start there's a clichéd over use of music score (which thankfully goes away pretty soon) and at first the child hood scenes seem ludicrous, but are used to better use in flashback later on in the film and to further develop the motivations, putting them into better context. On the whole I actually enjoyed this part of the film. None of the dialogue felt that hammy, none of the acting wooden or forced, no over the top, why use-actors-to-express-characters-emotions-when-you-can-get-a-composer-to-do- it type score. Now the hard parts out the way, the part that relies on proper character and film mechanics, it worked (although never quite bang on, but then it never would be). But was convincing enough, and even had a couple of truly beautiful, artistically creative sequences that recall loss and tragedy. My favourite scene, when Nolte gives his speech about a tragic moment that, in no way can ever be changed or compensated and becoming nothing but a memory, is truly heartbreaking, with barely a single bit of CGI in sight.

Then when the hulk kicks in and gets mean, damnit, it'll kick you. Hard. The climax is truly spectacular, showing you some heart stopping, never before seen stuff as the hulk leaps around and goes ape s***. People who say these SFX are rubbish, would probably say that you're holding up 5 fingers, when in actual fact you're holding up your index one. In reverse. At them. What the hell are these guys on? Yeah, I agree, Citizen Kane is a TERRIBLE film! Robert De Niros' best performance was adventures of Rocky and Bull Winkle, and NOT Raging Bull or The Deer Hunter. Al Pacino's best performance was Dick Tracy, and NOT Serpico or Godfather Part 2. STUPID MONGER! Now go book an appointment at the opticians, then see the film again when your vision has improved.

The use of CGI is so seamless, the expression on the hulks face and his movement with little to no blurring effect (always a fault of CGI) is pitch perfect, and Ang Lee has an ability not unlike Peter Jackson to shoot these scenes in a matter of fact, no big deal, seamless kinda way, which enhances it (note the Hulk rampaging about on the TV monitors, we only seem him in close up if we have to). Technically he's better than Gollum, although Gollum wins hands down in the performance stakes, whereas Hulk is more of an abominable creation that goes mad and smashy smashy just for fun, and does this with true grace and beauty, going YEAH YEAH! and loving it. Ace.

With 45 minutes of near flawless exposition, with more than adequate performances from all concerned (especially Nick Nolte and Eric Bana) and a not disappointing in the slightest, damn near ground breaking use of SFX climax, this, my friends, is how you make a genuinely a** kicking, overall more than satisfying big budget movie, that may hold up to numerous repeated viewings. Oh and it's the best, and most innovative, comic book adaptation since Superman.

the best kids movie since driller killer, henry is about a freindly stranger who likes to invite people (especially women) back to his pad for tea and cakes, and to show them his furry cuddly bears. sometimes to watch a nice little family movie, shot on video camera, often involving birthdays or a nice little tea party that takes place in the front room, even hide and seek. but henry is unhappy. he is unhappy because he is lonely, that people only use him for his tea parties, and they dont really like him. This then becomes a tail of tragedy, and features a very moving performance by michael rooker. when he looks into the camera and says 'Why have they left me? Because I didn't get bring the buckaroo. Oh lord, WHY DIDNT I BRING THE BUCKAROO?' it truelly becomes a moving, heart breaking moment in modern cinema.

........we are supposed to care about zion. When seeing the first film millions of times I never would have guessed that zion had such a huge part to play in the sequels. But it does. The wachowskis have tried to fit too much into this. The way I see it revoltions and return of the king aren't gonna be that different. Both have one saviour against a force of evil to help protect and save a place full of innocents eg zion and middle earth respectively. So when return of the king is out we will care about the crisis of middlearth cause it was so well developed in the first LOTR film. In revolutions (which is essentially about the fate of zion) no one will care because its been underdeveloped in MR. Maybe if the bloppoksis made it into a 4 part series and concentarted the second film on zion and made us care about it, then it would work, but it dont. Secondly if you go watch the first film now, despite being far better than this one, it sucks, because MR contradicts everything in it rather than developing its themes and plot points. It seems like a waste of time now and seeing them all back to back wont work either. I think that the bllopkiss have focused too much time on elaborate special effects, f***ing with out minds, kung fu, and that whole 'surprise factor' instead of making us care about the last human city on earth, which, ironically, are arguably the most rushed scenes in the film, when they should have been handled with the most amount of care. I'm not too sure if the film itself is to blame, more to do with the general approach of scriptwriting and the level and direction that the blposkis have decided to take the matrix story to (if that makes sense). It's as though both films were adapated from novels and the first one was filmable (as it had a linear narrative) but the second one wasn't, if you dig. Great SFX though (DUH!!).