Sign In Now ►
or Create A New Account ►
Rank This Matchup or Comment/Reply Below
That's a easy one! Ang Lee's Hulk sucks!
I concur, it was not very good. I wasn't a big fan of the climax of 'The Incredible Hulk' but the rest of the film was enjoyable. Especially Tim Roth.
Man, I've been waiting for this one. I am somebody who actually LIKED Ang Lee's Hulk. To me, it actually looked like a comic book come to life. I think I might have preferred Eric Bana to Edward Norton (just a little) as Bruce Banner. I KNOW I preferred Jennifer Connelly to Liv Tyler. Nick Nolte was a great villain. BUT...having said all that, Lee's Hulk is too long. And I do think I prefer Louis Letterier's more action-oriented approach. Tim Roth is great. These movies are nearly equal in my mind, but I do have to give the edge to The Incredible Hulk.
New Hulk smash first Hulk!!!
Both of these movies are actually pretty fun, and I really like how The Incredible Hulk didn't erase everything Hulk did. I mean, after only five years, there really was no point in ignoring everything that movie set up. Hulk wasn't as bad as people say it was, and The Incredible Hulk wasn't the vast improvement it was supposed to be . . . but it was more fun. The Incredible Hulk for the Win.
There can be only one.
Call me crazy, but I liked Ang Lee's version better. The Incredible Hulk seemed like a bad imitation of Ironman, whereas The Hulk actually attempted to bring the cinematography of the comic book graphical layout, and I for one think it actually worked. Also, Ed Norton is TERRIBLE as the Hulk - totally unconvincing. Roth is good in other things, but I was bored with him after his second scene (will he become the VILLAIN??!?!?!?). Liv Tyler plays her part okay, but is a vastly inferior performer to Jennifer Connelly. And however bad the ending to the Hulk was, it was nowhere NEAR as bad as the ending to the Incredible Hulk. The Superhero-vs.-anti-Superhero phenomenon (also seen in Ironman) is one of the lamest copouts in either script writing or comic book writing, and its putrid lack of any semblance of creativity is on horrific display during the drawn-out, boring conclusion to this movie.
This doesn't deserve one comment, let alone nine.
The newer one was more fun (I guess), but I liked Ang Lee's better overall/ Plus, they didn't fix the worst thing about the 1st one: big fake looking CGI Hulk.
New Hulk is better.
No fucking contest.
I don't like to bash Hulk as much as some people but it is definitely not what I would call a 'good' film. The Incredible Hulk, on the other hand, was incredibly entertaining.
ugh. Can I go with the tv show? No? Oh ok.
I didn't hate Ang Lee's Hulk, especially when you compare it to other Marvel films of the same period. But it still suffered from poor pacing, boring fights, and one or two poorly acted characters. The Incredible Hulk did the character more justice.
Incredible Hulk passes Ang Lee's poorly paced mess in every single way. If Marvel had left some of those deleted scenes (character development) in IH, it would've been even better. Live and learn, Marvel.
"Hulk" just sucked, so when "The Incredible Hulk" came out I didn't really want to see it. But I did it anyway and I was surprised. It was actually a very good movie. Ed Norton was a great Bruce Banner, better then Eric Bana. And Norton had more chemistry with Liv Tyler then Bana had with Jennifer Connolly (allthough Connolly is the better actress).
They're equally mediocre, but Lee's has the edge because he at least made Banner psychologically interesting.
Ang Lee's has some problems, but no more so than Marvel Studio's reboot.
Note to Marvel, if you need to add action scenes to move your story along, you're telling it wrong.
Everything Marvel has done as a solo studio has outclassed everything the WB has done and that includes Nolan's Batman. I don't think Marvel needs to worry about taking advice from the studio that keeps crapping out stuff like Green Lantern and Jonah Hex. Marvel let Universal and Ang Lee get creative and look at what happened in 2003. Thank God they got full control over the Avengers characters.
I don't think that The Incredible Hulk (2008) did anything especially wrong. It feels exactly like a solid, uninspired entry into the Marvel Avengers Initiative. Ang Lee's film, by comparison, felt like it was taking some major risks and making some major creative efforts. Lee's film is too long, too unevenly paced, and has a bleakness to it that people find difficult to swallow when they go to a film to see HULK! SMASH!
Norton is a better actor than Bana, but Bana does better here.
Roth is a better actor than Nolte, but Nolte is more memorable here.
Jennifer Conelly is definitely better than Liv Tyler, though neither is especially memorable...
Both feel like 7/10 films for me, but Lee's is a 9/10 which loses points for lousy CG and pointless monster battles. The 2008 one only ever aspired to be a 7/10, and hit its mediocre mark without even trying.
Ang Lee took a perfectly blah comic book character and turned his story into an insufferable family drama. Screw that noise.
neither are that good. Hulk was crap and The Incredible Hulk was average at the most.
I thought that the first one was terrible. I think they should make it a rule if a big budget movie fails just remake it with edward norton and ignore the first one even existed
The hulk to the left wins it. The one to the right tried but it just didn't work as planned i guess. I kinda liked it. The fight with his dad was pretty intense. Doesn't matter anyway cuz the avengers has the new hulk lol.
Neither are great, but at least one of them didn't put me to sleep...
I agree with Whimper's comment. Hulk is bleak, which I feel is the biggest reason it gets completely crapped on by everyone out there. I liked that bleakness and how it was more of a family drama than a simple smash'em that Incredible Hulk turned out to be. Say what you want about Ang Lee's Hulk, but it is perhaps the most unique out of these two films, not to mention more memorable.
Every single film Marvel Studios has produced is drastically overrated, including the Avengers.
Hulk is the better told story.
The first Hulk wins for me. I'm the only one that likes the first Hulk. The new Hulk looks just weird, but the 2003 Hulk looked exactly like I pictured him in my mind. Plus, I like the action sequences in the 2003 Hulk better, like the whole desert scene and the escape from the water tank, epic, just epic. Didn't really like the ending but overall, it was good. The 2008 Hulk was ok, and do think Tim Roth is a better villain than Nolte, but they were both good. Hulk(2003) wins
Ang Lee's version
at least the incredible hulk made sens
Both pretty bad - but Jennifer Connelly is hot, so I take the Ang Lee Hulk.
The newest Hulk was better than the Original some what Newest Hulk was new trall Ang lee's Hulk not even could volled much of Original about eric bana can not stand the choice of psychological turn as reilleful liv puts as stands hards pulls
it is hard trying to take the lawyer from cape fear give him a beard and turn him into rocks and make it cooler than Mr.Orange as abomination
SPFX For the win also 2008
Pff, yeah, this is easy. The 2008 version is by no means great, but I do think it's better than at least half of the Phase 1 films (yes, that DOES include the first Iron Man). "But MysticSpoon, the 2003 version felt like reading a comic book!"... no. No, it did not. The Ang Lee version was not just really boring (and unnecessarily long), it was also really stupid. Say what you want about the 2008 version, at least that didn't have a green rubbery plastic man fighting mutant dogs surrounded by dry drama. No thanks, I'll go with the one where Mr. Orange fights Mr. Green (did they just cast Tim Roth just for that reason? Whatever).
Yep, Hulk old is hugely better.
Just watched both. Hulk was terrible! The Incredible Hulk was ok. So I guess it goes to TIH over Hulk. But to be honest, IMO, not Marvels best work in either.
Ang Lee's version is leaps and bounds better than the complete nothingness of the 2008 version in nearly every aspect. Neither are absolutely tremendous, but I do like the 2003 Hulk somewhat. Can't say the same for 2008's.
Ang Lee is fail.
Ang Lee's Hulk is bleak and upsetting and I appreciate that. The Incredible Hulk tried to be more of a traditional siuperhero movie and it's a lesser entry because of that. Hulk is one man against the world while The Incredible Hulk boils down to Superhero vs Supervillain, which really doesn't work with that character.
Ang Lee's Hulk *smashes* Norton's boring tripe.
Going with 2008 of Norton role while it was the okay better hulk version and since Hulk 2003 is often one of the worst bad effort films ever with terrible cgi effects and boring story bad plot.
Ang Lee made one of the most beautiful comic book movies of all time, Marvel made some generic crap that's only kind of fun due to Norton's performance.
Ang Lee put together some cheesy squares, called them comic book style "panels" and told a quite atrocious story about family...or boredom...or something. Who the hell knows? I doubt Ang Lee himself knows. Dude basically remade a 1970's Asian wedding video but, y'know, with fewer things of interest happening. 2008 Hulk is mediocrity in motion, but at least it's not a bowel motion.
2008 Hulk by a wide margin. It's actually a very enjoyable movie with a great final battle, adding a much better villain and pacing to the mix this isn't close.
7.5/10 for TIH meanwhile 6/10 for 2003 Hulk.
Admitting that Incredible Hulk movie was the better that trended from the second installment of where it goes on the MCU, where as hulk 2003 was a major bad forgotten disappointment along with bad story, boring plot and awful cgi
Incredible Hulk is way better than 2003 Hulk
Honestly the gap for me between the two Hulk movies isn't big, I hate both of them, the MCU wins, but TIH is the worst MCU movie for me