[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]IamMarqaos wrote:
Both Hulk story lines were utterly disappointing. Why Norton is considered better is beyond me. They both missed the mark completely. Dr. Banner became the Hulk because he risked his own life to save Rick Jones from getting killed by a Gamma bomb test. Rick then becomes Dr. Banner’s confidant.
Dr. Banner becomes the Hulk not because of self experimentation or because his dad messed up his genes, no, it is because of an accident, a heroic deed gone wrong (for him). Rick Jones actually became such and integral character/side kick that they even teamed him up with Captain America and Captain Mar-Vell.
The Hulk character was genius and it is retarded to change the way Bannar turned into the Hulk. How do you identify with a guy who experimented on himself and got himself messed up? You don’t. You can identify with the guy bullied that’s getting bit by a spider and the guy who saw his parents killed in front of him when he was ten as well as the guy hit with gamma rays while trying to save some dumb ass who accepted a dare driving on a bomb testing site. The original stories are what drew us in to these characters and stories and to deviate from it is arrogant.
Norton and Lee do not know better and that character should not have been messed with at all. Why did Spiderman work so well? Why did Batman work so well? They stuck as close to the original story as possible. Why did Superman Returns suck a large amount of monkey balls? He knocked Lois Lane up, did not tell her he was Clark Kent and left. Wow, talk about veering away from what your character stands for. No amount of special effects can make up for that.
Hulk is no different, actually, with Hulk especially they should have stayed close to the original story. He turned into a monster because he saved somebody and his journey is now trying to find a way to become human again. Awesome story line and they fucked it up.
/end rant (love that character damnit :))[/quote]
Dude, they left that “caught in a gamma explosion” origin behind quite a while ago…like, the 1970’s.[/quote]
And your point being? Yes, they left it behind in the TV series but not in the comics. They did not significantly change Banner till 1987 and after 1991 they really went of the deep end with it. They restarted the series at least 5 times and it never regained the popularity it once had.
But your point is moot as it SHOULD NOT have been left behind at all in the movies. The ticket sales and the comic sales/troubles prove this. Who are the ones buying the tickets? The guys that grew up with the characters. The guys who have been waiting their whole life to see them on the big screen. I started reading Hulk when I was 6 (1974) and still have every comic. Hulk had been around then already for 12 years. Not as a stand alone but with the FF and the Avengers. Cool as shit. We are the ones buying the tickets and we want to see what we grew up with. Same reason for Spidey and that’s why the sales were off the hook.
They were lucky that the TV show did an excellent job at character building and that Bill Bixby is phenomenal actor. Even Ferrigno did a great job with his pained looks and other facial expressions indicating the deep pain with the ‘monster’. The movies did a poor job of doing that.
Ever since they abandoned that initial story-line the Hulk hasn’t been the same nor has it enjoyed the same popularity. And this is true for virtually every super hero character.
Every time they change an ‘origin’ of a character they lose readership as they are simply not as good as the original ones. The Hulk was based on Jeckyll, Hyde, Frankenstein and the Jewish Golem idea. All these things draw you into a character like nothing else. Nothing Norton or Lee did drew you into the character. Especially not the Hulk himself. You simply cannot deny this.
Even if they had wanted to change the gamma explosion angle, they should not have changed that he became the Hulk by accident, while performing a heroic deed.
The movies did not do well because of what I mentioned, whether you actually think Norton was on the right track or not. Those that are passionate about the Hulk character en masse hated it because of writers not sticking to the original story. That’s fact and you cannot argue with it.
It would be similar to Spiderman getting his powers after experimenting on himself with spider venom. That has implications for the mind set of the character. It changes the ‘reluctant hero’ aspect we all love and that is especially prevalent in the Stan Lee/Jack Kirby characters.
ah well, can’t believe I am spending my day of arguing on behalf of the Hulk 
God I am a geek.
And so are you, so you are alright in my book
