....HULK says Abomination looks like shit!
Click on title to see big dookie.
I can't beleive they thought this was an improvement
on the Abomination's original look. Can you say Resident Evil
throwaway?
Added 3/23/2008 by Krayonzilla
Even if O'l Big Ears has had different
interpretations over the years. He has maintained the same characteristics.
It's a cool design by Gil Kane. Can't stand those who are saying he wouldn't look REAL in CGI or cartoony. I highly disagree.
11 comments:
One thing it absolutely gets right is that a Marvel comic would be about big showcased fight scenes. I want to see that CG character fight they build up to .
Saw this earlier today and I must say I'm very disappointed. As one of the two people on the entire planet that liked Ang Lee's Hulk movie, I don't see how this is too different from what Lee brought to the screen. And I think the Hulk ILM cooked up five years ago looked better, to boot.
I liked Eric Bana as Banner. Norton seems bored in this trailer. I'm a big Tim Roth, fan, so at least I can look forward to seeing what he brings to the party. I definitely don't like the design of the Abomination. The whole thing looks like a direct-to-video sequel.
Hope I'm wrong on this one.
Hulk is a little wasp waisted. Ang Lee's flick had it's moments. I agree that Eric Bana, the beauty of Jennifer Connelly and Sam Eliot as Thunderbolt Ross will be hard to beat.
Yes... right cast, right effects, wrong script on the first one.
I do have to say that I've always felt that his name never lived up to his design... which is to say that I don't think that the Abomination looks like an abomination. The guy in the trailer looks like he should be called an Abomination.
This is true, Rick. I never thought the name fit the look of the character in the comic. The movie design seems suitably abominable.
I prefer the comic book version. I do like the big fight buildup though. I never saw the Ang Lee version. Should I?
See the Ang Lee version Jeff. It's got a solid 15 minutes where he Hulks out escaping military captivity. I really liked his bullet proof effect. The bullets don't bounce, they look like they go in a couple of inches and probably hurt. The ending was a disappointment. And it had the biggest promise where he fights another unnatural creature but it fizzles.
Yeah, the Hulk action is worth a rental, but the added Banner history was a drag on the film. Tommy would love this movie, but I haven't shown it to him because of the Banner family history was from a different sort of movie. I fear that the next Batman movie will be like that, too. Ironman, on the other hand, looks like something I can take him to, and perhaps this new Hulk film, too.
I also agree that the "climactic" battle was anything but.
So, which Marvel character is next (or ought to be next) for a movie makeover? I'm hard-pressed to see Thor working well in the movies, the costume may be too outrageous, but if you throw in the Warriors 3 then you could have something that is pretty entertaining...
What do you mean "the costume may be too outrageous"? A Thor movie should be handled like the GREAT costumed epics of the past. It should be Grand, Lound, Bold and full of Shakespearean trained actors.
I mean "Grand, Loud, Bold and full of Shakespearean trained actors.
"
Post a Comment