Luke Skywalker 1,795 Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 Music clips are available at Amazon.com: The Incredible Hulk Soundtrack [MP3]. I'm listening them right now!... and yes many excerpts are similar with Elfman score...so it was not 'just strings'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romão 2,274 Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 There are moments, specially outside in the desert, where the 2003 Hulk absolutely stunning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarbas 1 Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 Music clips are available at Amazon.com: The Incredible Hulk Soundtrack [MP3]. I'm listening them right now!... and yes many excerpts are similar with Elfman score...so it was not 'just strings'? Ok, the percussion is very similar too! :PThere are moments, specially outside in the desert, where the 2003 Hulk absolutely stunning.Absolutely! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Skywalker 1,795 Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 There are moments, specially outside in the desert, where the 2003 Hulk absolutely stunning.Absolutely! lets see if this movie matches that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie 1,059 Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 The score clips almost sound like they're from Zimmer's stable.They have an RC-ish sound to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaderbait1 1 Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 The Hulk in general sucks and probably could never be rendered non-laughable. He's a "grrrr!" angry green guy. Stupid concept to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryant Burnette 654 Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 The Hulk in general sucks and probably could never be rendered non-laughable. He's a "grrrr!" angry green guy. Stupid concept to begin with.So glad you're here to tell us these things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldsmithFanatic2000+ 0 Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 So glad indeed. Where was this guy when I needed someone to shrug off and not agree with?I'll make my judgments after having seen the film. I'm seeing it in a few days.If I like what I hear, then I shall sit down and give the album a spin.If The Incredible Hulk is worse than that appalling 2003 film? Let's just stop there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie 1,059 Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 The Hulk in general sucks and probably could never be rendered non-laughable. He's a "grrrr!" angry green guy. Stupid concept to begin with.Yes I'm sure Marvel Comics is upset that the comic is still going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaderbait1 1 Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 The Hulk in general sucks and probably could never be rendered non-laughable. He's a "grrrr!" angry green guy. Stupid concept to begin with.Yes I'm sure Marvel Comics is upset that the comic is still going.Hey, I never said people have good taste. Really, though, no incarnation of the Hulk on screen has ever been good, or even close. How do people expect this one to be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie 1,059 Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 The TV series with Bill Bixby did pretty good.You just gotta find the right director and storyline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 There are moments, specially outside in the desert, where the 2003 Hulk absolutely stunning.absolutely not.Edward Norton is not receiving writing credits for this movie, but previews have been strong, perhaps the story is better. If the story is good, one can forgive the attrocious effects that this film obviously has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wycket 36 Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 I think people are far too critical with these effects. Do they look CGI yes, but can you really make a 8 ft. tall green beast look real? I just don't see how people can call these effects atrocious. Are they ILM level? No, but ILM didn't do such a great job the last time either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 I think people are far too critical with these effects. Do they look CGI yes, but can you really make a 8 ft. tall green beast look real? I just don't see how people can call these effects atrocious. Are they ILM level? No, but ILM didn't do such a great job the last time either.because they are atrocious, funny that in 92, and 93, they made a metallic man look real, or that they made a t-rex, and several other types of dinosaurs real. People though smegal looked real. In all fairness the color might be part of the problem but it looks atrocious, Mummy Returns bad. but you still missed the biggest point laughingbat, if the story works the effects can be forgiven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Skywalker 1,795 Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 The ILM hulk looked great for 2003. It still does, in fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 because they are atrocious, funny that in 92, and 93, they made a metallic man look real, or that they made a t-rex, and several other types of dinosaurs real.The animatronic T-Rex looks great, but JP's CGI has aged poorly.People though smegal looked real. In all fairness the color might be part of the problem but it looks atrocious,Yet he's a completely convincing character Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Skywalker 1,795 Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 People though smegal looked real. In all fairness the color might be part of the problem but it looks atrocious,Yet he's a completely convincing characterI think he was critisizing the hulk's green skin and the new movie effects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wycket 36 Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 I think people are far too critical with these effects. Do they look CGI yes, but can you really make a 8 ft. tall green beast look real? I just don't see how people can call these effects atrocious. Are they ILM level? No, but ILM didn't do such a great job the last time either.because they are atrocious, funny that in 92, and 93, they made a metallic man look real, or that they made a t-rex, and several other types of dinosaurs real. People though smegal looked real. In all fairness the color might be part of the problem but it looks atrocious, Mummy Returns bad. but you still missed the biggest point laughingbat, if the story works the effects can be forgiven.Oh, I know. I don't care about the effects, but it just seems everyone says the effects are terrible where I just don't see it. There at least seems to be a good story for this film (something the last one really didn't have). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Skywalker 1,795 Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 I think people are far too critical with these effects. Do they look CGI yes, but can you really make a 8 ft. tall green beast look real? I just don't see how people can call these effects atrocious. Are they ILM level? No, but ILM didn't do such a great job the last time either.because they are atrocious, funny that in 92, and 93, they made a metallic man look real, or that they made a t-rex, and several other types of dinosaurs real. People though smegal looked real. In all fairness the color might be part of the problem but it looks atrocious, Mummy Returns bad. but you still missed the biggest point laughingbat, if the story works the effects can be forgiven.Oh, I know. I don't care about the effects, but it just seems everyone says the effects are terrible where I just don't see it. There at least seems to be a good story for this film (something the last one really didn't have).Didnt they do this move because the other had too much story-drama instead of hulk smash, hulk destroy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldsmithFanatic2000+ 0 Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 Didnt they do this move because the other had too much story-drama instead of hulk smash, hulk destroy?They did the move because the other film was a steaming pile of horse manure.May Ang "Sleepybonk Mountain" Lee never touch another comic book franchise ever again.Hulk managed to not only disgrace it's source material, but even further disgrace the much beloved television series primarily responsible for the Hulk's huge serge in popularity over the years in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 because they are atrocious, funny that in 92, and 93, they made a metallic man look real, or that they made a t-rex, and several other types of dinosaurs real.The animatronic T-Rex looks great, but JP's CGI has aged poorly.People though smegal looked real. In all fairness the color might be part of the problem but it looks atrocious,Yet he's a completely convincing characterI completely disagree, JP's CGI still looks as convincing today as it did 15 years ago, the real joy is watching people say what you just said, but then when put to the test they cannot pick out what is animatronix and what is cgi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Skywalker 1,795 Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 I completely disagree, JP's CGI still looks as convincing today as it did 15 years ago, the real joy is watching people say what you just said, but then when put to the test they cannot pick out what is animatronix and what is cgi.I think you are wrong there. Yes the CGI is still convincing.But i think than in JP, you can discern very well what is CGI and what is Animatronic. I can, at least.JPIII though, has worse CGI (not worse per se...but since its open day mostly and do more difficult things to do its more noticeable) but there are some moments with raptors when they show a transition between CGI and animatronic, and it's imposible to discern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 so Luke you can spot the exact moment the animatronix t-rex switches to the CGI one, how very good of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Skywalker 1,795 Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 so Luke you can spot the exact moment the animatronix t-rex switches to the CGI one, how very good of you.Yes... in fact, I think that in JP there arent any switches betweem CGI and puppet on screen. It's always different shots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koray Savas 2,251 Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 No CGI is good enough for people not to know it's CGI. That's a physical impossibility. I can spot the CGI T-Rex from the animatronix one in JP as well, but that doesn't mean both aren't extremely convincing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Skywalker 1,795 Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 more convincing than zimmer's fake orchestras No CGI is good enough for people not to know it's CGI. That's a physical impossibility.Not really, there are some small snippets of things in some movies that pass for real.Example: fountain in padmes appartment in ROTS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 why not do a real fountain instead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Skywalker 1,795 Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 why not do a real fountain instead?Dont ask me. I was also amazed at the unnecessaryness of it as well as the perfection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 i bet they talk about it for 2 minutes on the commentary tracks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 Uncle George, Uncle George can we put a CGI film in the movie, we promise to make it look good.Ok boys, go ahead.oh Kids, don't ya just love them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Coscina 3 Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 I agree with Merkel that the desert battle in the HULK (2003) was quite good. The shot where he's running towards the tank is amazingly realistic mostly because he moved slower from a distance as would be expected in real life. I do not think the new Hulk looks any better. The only reason why preview audiences probably prefer it is due to the action-styled story rather than something a little more symbolic and perhaps too existential for a comic book film. I applaud what Ang Lee tried to accomplish with the first film and like it for what it tried to be. I am fine with those who dislike it but do not tell me what to like or not to like. I got a lot of meaning from HULK when I saw it and even if it hasn't aged that well, I still LOVE Elfman's music way the hell more than anything I've heard from Armstrong in these clips. Like Mark said, it sounds over-processed synth crap to my ears. And seeing that I've been involved with electronic music since 1984, I know of what I speak.By the way, Armstrong's music does BARELY recall Elfman's theme. Just because he's using staccato strings does not mean it's the same descending note motive. The intervals are not the same. Trust me, I have perfect pitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 75 Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 No CGI is good enough for people not to know it's CGI. That's a physical impossibility.Davy Jones fooled a lot of people, but then again, it's the best CG character yet put on film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryant Burnette 654 Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 No CGI is good enough for people not to know it's CGI. That's a physical impossibility.Davy Jones fooled a lot of people, but then again, it's the best CG character yet put on film.Yeah, he's pretty awesome.I still think that one of THE best uses of CGI was for Lieutenant Dan's missing legs in Forrest Gump. CGI was still so relatively new when that movie came out, a lot of people had no clue "how they'd done it." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 The best CGI effects are the ones that are never talked about on Internet Forums, because we do not realise they are effects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Skywalker 1,795 Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 The best CGI effects are the ones that are never talked about on Internet Forums, because we do not realise they are effects.That has some truth in it, but then unimpressive or easy to make effects dont get much talk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryant Burnette 654 Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 Personally, I'm excited about The Incredible Hulk, and I don't really care too much if the CGI isn't totally convincing. Really, the effects only have to be good enough to not detract from the story, and if the actors on screen seem to believe in what's going on, then so will I.And doggone it, I still like The Hulk, too. It's overwrought in the wrong places, and it's pretentious, but it worked for me. It's also another one of those cases in which I totally understand why the (tons of) people who hate it feel the way they feel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 The Trailer i saw before KOCS looked like it gave away the whole film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie 1,059 Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 I believe it's actually cheaper to use CGI than to build large sets. Joe is correct about the new Hulk film. I've also heard it's testing well in pre-screenings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Limbonaut 2 Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 I'm surprised the TV spots have revealed this cameo appearance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trent B 337 Posted June 10, 2008 Author Share Posted June 10, 2008 Well they're supposed to be setting everything up so they can make a live action Avenger's movie. For those of you who have not seen Iron Man yet...At the end of Iron Man's credits, it showed a scene in the bar where Sam Jackson makes a cameo as Nick Fury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 actually it was in Tony's house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trent B 337 Posted June 10, 2008 Author Share Posted June 10, 2008 I think I read some where supposedly Captain America is gonna make an cameo in The Incredible Hulk as well, not sure who's playing him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 I saw that yesterday as well. Imagine one day where we might go a summer without a superhero movie, how cool would that be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trent B 337 Posted June 10, 2008 Author Share Posted June 10, 2008 Indeed. The Superhero movies are getting a bit out of hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Crichton 4 Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Just now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie 1,059 Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Well might as well forget about the next 10 years because the Super Hero films are coming like cars off a production line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Skywalker 1,795 Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Well they're supposed to be setting everything up so they can make a live action Avenger's movie. For those of you who have not seen Iron Man yet...At the end of Iron Man's credits, it showed a scene in the bar where Sam Jackson makes a cameo as Nick Fury.So if they make the avengers movie, will be Iron man be made by ILM? And the hulk, will they resort to ILM again? Or will everything go to Rythm and Hues? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Limbonaut 2 Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 I'm tired of bad superhero movies like Daredevil and the Fantastic Four, but if it's a good one I'll like it. I don't know if the Hulk is going to be good but I liked Iron Man a lot and think The Dark Knight is going to be great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacck 23 Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 The clips on Amazon sound pretty bland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 75 Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 I'm tired of bad superhero movies like Daredevil and the Fantastic Four, but if it's a good one I'll like it. I don't know if the Hulk is going to be good but I liked Iron Man a lot and think The Dark Knight is going to be great.I agree. Things actually seem to be on the up-swing, I think this Summer movie season has already beaten last year's in terms of quality movies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now