Mobile Phone | Auto Parts | Free Credit Report | Credit Cards | Blog5 Game Cheats
"The Hulk" Review [Archive] - FreeConservatives

PDA

View Full Version : "The Hulk" Review


Dash_Riprock
06-20-2003, 08:08 PM
I went to see the new flick about the big green guy.

I didn't have high expectations going into the flick, but actually enjoyed it for the most part. The movie is too long--about 2 hours 20 minutes--but I didn't find myself looking at my watch. My biggest concern going in was that the computer graphics would look really cheesy, especially since the promos they've broadcast didn't look that good. But I was impressed for the most part with the big guy. Up close, he looked pretty convincing. It was only on some far away shots that the graphics were a bit suspect.

The best scene, in my opinion, was one where the Hulkster fights three "special" dogs. If you want find out what I mean by "special," then you'll just have to see the movie. There are some other pretty good fight scenes--and it's neat to watch him jumping. If you have any familiarity with the TV series with Bixby and Ferrigno, or the comic book, then you pretty much know the plot.

The ending is probably the worst part of the movie. It's a bit drawn out and a little confusing. Nick Nolte, as Bruce Banner's father, is over the top in his performance, and he looks like he has had a few thousand too many. Man, the guy looks as bad as Jan-Michael Vincent of "Airwolf" fame--and that's saying something! Sam Elliot does well in his role of General Thaddeus Ross, but he is definitely NOT a sympathetic character. Jennifer Connelly, as Banner's love interest Betty Ross, is pretty good--but that gal needs to start eating again. She's a rail and, sadly, she has lost her "twins." I know, that's sexist, but it's true.

Overall, I walked out of the theater fairly satisfied. It's not a good enough movie to inspire any sequels, but who knows. Is it worth the price of a ticket? I guess that depends. If you like the genre, then go see it. If you're looking for a blockbuster type of movie, then I would suggest that you wait until it comes out for rental. It certainly is worth at least that much.

Wyatt_Junker
06-20-2003, 09:26 PM
Wasn't the Hulk just misunderstood?

His bruised inner child never fully rectified...

Dash_Riprock
06-20-2003, 09:29 PM
Yeah, well, this "inner child" is 15 feet tall and makes Arnie look like Pee Wee Herman.

Wyatt_Junker
06-20-2003, 09:58 PM
I saw a special on big Lou yesterday.

Apparently Ferrigno was unmatched in total mass not only in his day, but some say still is. In the category of aggregate mass Lou stood alone.

He was 6'4". But get this. The sucker weighed 360 pounds! Its unheard of, even among the Muscle-n-Fitness crowd. He literally was the hulk.

**DONOTDELETE**
06-21-2003, 12:21 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Wyatt_Junker said:
I saw a special on big Lou yesterday.

Apparently Ferrigno was unmatched in total mass not only in his day, but some say still is. In the category of aggregate mass Lou stood alone.

He was 6'4". But get this. The sucker weighed 360 pounds! Its unheard of, even among the Muscle-n-Fitness crowd. He literally was the hulk.


[/ QUOTE ]


I met this guy at a sci fi convention, this guy is HUGE! His bicep was as wide as my head!!! Real nice guy too.

Dash_Riprock
06-21-2003, 08:00 AM
Lou has a bit part in the new movie. He's head of security at the company where Banner works. It looked like the moviemakers had a tough time finding a shirt that would fit him. I'm not kidding!

Wyatt_Junker
06-21-2003, 10:49 AM
[ QUOTE ]
ConservativeGodzilla said:
[ QUOTE ]
Wyatt_Junker said:
I saw a special on big Lou yesterday.

Apparently Ferrigno was unmatched in total mass not only in his day, but some say still is. In the category of aggregate mass Lou stood alone.

He was 6'4". But get this. The sucker weighed 360 pounds! Its unheard of, even among the Muscle-n-Fitness crowd. He literally was the hulk.


[/ QUOTE ]


I met this guy at a sci fi convention, this guy is HUGE! His bicep was as wide as my head!!! Real nice guy too.

[/ QUOTE ]

More muscle mass simply equates into more torque. The larger the stronger. You usually don't see the proportion always at the gym because the big guys lift slower and cleaner than the wannabe boys. The newbies strain-n-grunt, their neck vein near aneuryism levels, the tender and delicate architecture of their backs grossly hyperextended, dangerously risking their future on a few extra ego points like very expensive China, each disc in their back on top of eachother and then a wheelbarrow-full of cinderblocks is dumped on it. But the big guys who've been lifting for decades don't lift that much because they know about injury and the future and also know that by lifting one fifth of the amount of that shouting idiot in the corner of the gym, that they can, in absolute perfect form get more muscle breakdown acheived at a faster rate. And if they ever wanted, they could put so much weight on the bar that it'd nearly snap the dumbell shaft.

My point being that Lou probably could outlift most other guys. Another factor though is size. Short, squatty guys can lift more by virtue of physics. A guy 6' tall can't lift as much as a guy who's 5'6" if everything else remains constant. The 6' guy has to move everything farther across a wider swath of gliding joint range. Its why most world record holders in the squat, deadlift or old over the head heave-ho are short dudes. And fat helps too, by keeping the weight firmly planted in the unshakeable, unmoveable center.