‘The Incredible Hulk’ Indeed Jacked Up on CGI Roids, But Medusa’s in His Face

HollywoodChicago.com — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 22:01:00 -0700

Rating: 4.0/5.0

CHICAGO – Technology has done double-edged service and disservice to the legendary Hulk superhero character from Stan Lee’s Marvel Comics.

In peering at the CGI-created ripped body of nothing remotely reminiscent of Edward Norton, the 2008 film iteration of “The Incredible Hulk” has a leg light years up on Lou Ferrigno’s character in the 1978 television series of the “The Incredible Hulk”. Then, Ferrigno only had the luxury of makeup. The rest was the real deal.

The unbridled force of rage known as The Hulk on the streets of New York in an all-new, explosive and action-packed epic of one of the most popular superheroes of all time in “The Incredible Hulk”.
Photo credit: Rhythm & Hues

On the other hand, Ferrigno – who treats 2008 audiences in a gasping reveal when he appears in a brief cameo in the new Louis Leterrier-directed feature film – is still the soul, spirit and most critically the face of the green-skinned behemoth.

Edward Norton stars as Dr. Bruce Banner in an all-new, explosive and action-packed epic of one of the most popular superheroes of all time in “The Incredible Hulk”.
Photo credit: Michael Gibson

Aside from Ferrigno’s brief face time, he also lurks notably in the background as Norton’s voice when the character gets royally pissed and transforms into the Hulk.

When Norton fumes past his human limit, honing in on the Hulk character’s technologically enhanced face is awkwardly unrealistic and utterly painful.

It’s like gazing into the eyes of the sea nymph Medusa whose monstrous face could threateningly turn onlookers to stone.

While Hollywood’s big-budget technology department both strikes out and smashes a homerun with its revamped and roided-up Hulk character, Tim Roth’s altered ego gets the just-right royal treatment.

When Roth becomes the Abomination to rival the Hulk, the abominable baddie is so disgustingly repulsive and out of such reality whack that his CGI renovation plays perfectly.

A monstrous new adversary known as The Abomination faces off with The Hulk in an all-new, explosive and action-packed epic of one of the most popular superheroes of all time in “The Incredible Hulk”.
Photo credit: Rhythm & Hues

Like he did in all three “Spider-Man” films, various “X-Men” films and many other Marvel film products, Marvel phenom Stan Lee (the former chairman of Marvel Comics) again can’t help but pop in for his moment of minor screen glory.

Now Liv Tyler – who hasn’t memorably emerged in a film since 1998’s “Armageddon” – can finally be classified as the new Meg Ryan with her heartfelt delivery as Edward Norton’s young love.

While you felt sorry for the forgettable bloke who she swiftly casts aside when she’s suddenly reunited with Norton, suffice it to say they’ve got game together. Her chemistry especially for Norton is a surprisingly tender balance to the film’s mammoth smashing and outrageous carnage.

RELATED IMAGE GALLERY
View our high-resolution “The Incredible Hulk” image gallery.

RELATED READING
More film reviews from critic Adam Fendelman.

Norton himself is trademarked by his restraint. As he seeks a cure for the gamma radiation poisoning that periodically unleashes the barbarian, he works tirelessly on his Zen. He even scrutinizes the condition with a pulse-monitoring watch.

In particular, a near-sex scene between Norton and Tyler sheds comical light on the situation when his heart rate escalates and he’s forced to stop before something incredible pops up.

While 2008’s “The Incredible Hulk” delivers the heart-pounding, Hulk-smashing thrill ride audiences expect, the real story of the film is in its substory and how those trinkets will be ironed out in the future.

While Robert Downey Jr. is uncredited in the film, there’s an avenging reason to drop the nugget of a “super soldier serum,” Captain America and “getting the team together”. Indeed, this wild ride will carry on.

“The Incredible Hulk” opened everywhere on June 12, 2008.

By ADAM FENDELMAN
Editor-in-Chief
HollywoodChicago.com
adam@hollywoodchicago.com

With Surreal Madness, Strange Boys Play ‘Funny Games’

HollywoodChicago.com — Sat, 15 Mar 2008 16:36:03 -0700

CHICAGO – Imagine a film with no redeeming or uplifting emotional qualities with evil that tortures the soul, squirm-inducing narrative elements and a relentless anxiety that practically has us – like the characters in the film – screaming for mercy. Imagine also that this film is excellent.

Naomi Watts in “Funny Games”.
Photo credit: IMDb

“Funny Games” is a shot-by-shot remake of writer and director Michael Haneke’s 1997 Austrian film of the same name, which now features American actors and their presumed sensibilities.

Naomi Watts from “The Ring” is Ann: the 30-something matriarch of an upper-middle class American family who’s heading for their vacation home.

Her husband, George (Tim Roth), and son, Georgie (Devon Gearhart), are accompanying her. As the family approaches the heavily gated development, a murky apprehension is in the air as familiar friends offer tentative greetings.

The source for all this unease is a pair of boys – the eerie Michael Pitt and Brady Corbet – in their early 20s who are dressed in casual white clothing down to their gloved hands. While they approach the home of Ann and George with the presupposed notion to borrow some eggs, the reason for their infiltration is much more maniacal.

Naomi Watts, Michael Pitt (middle) and Brady Corbet
in “Funny Games”.
Photo credit: IMDb

They capture the family and begin torturing them. They force them to play a series of barbarous games that take them to the limits of sadistic persecution.

The “funny” awareness of this story is that it’s always edge-of-the-seat compelling despite the bad taste of the power trip by the boys over the family.

Using a deliberate and almost winking-at-the-camera approach, director Haneke creates a meditation on the ruthlessness that is symbolically lyrical.

George as portrayed by Roth is rendered as ineffectual from the outset of the boy’s penetration.

There is a sense of his giving up when his vulnerability is exposed, which leaves Watt’s Ann character as the only saving grace for the family. Is it the youth of the perpetrators that’s doing him in or his immediate capitulation to impotence after being humiliated in front of his family?

Michael Pitt in “Funny Games”.
Photo credit: IMDb

The boys themselves – who refer to each other in pop-culture pairings such as Peter and Paul, Tom and Jerry or Beavis and Butthead – relish their roles as avenging angels of eternal rest.

Despite shortcomings that are obvious, their ability to control the events through violence and sadism designs a larger measure to their presence and power.

They are portrayed as white god-like creatures with an ability to effortlessly manipulate events within the film while also existing also outside them. One particular action even proves their invincibility, which ratchets the creep factor right up into our faces.

This is cinematic gamesmanship that is simultaneously brutal, bizarre and elegant in its audacity. Like his previous film “Caché” in 2005, Haneke has artistically exploited cinematic structure to play with and engage the mind. It’s a very funny game indeed.

“Funny Games” opened on March 14, 2008.

Click here for our full “Funny Games” image gallery!

By PATRICK McDONALD
Staff Writer
HollywoodChicago.com
pat@hollywoodchicago.com