Incredible Hulk (2003) vs Incredible hulk (2008) which you like more?

[Seaside]

I also found out the reason they not making a new solo hulk movie is because they sold the rights to Universal.
Marvel film cinema before they came together and started in 2008 before that they sold the rights to character Spiderman to Sony. That why they cannot use the two other spiderman movies series tied into there current Spiderman reboot.



I like 2003 Hulk more i think it better and more real also more dark story to it and the desert fight scenes and military stuff cool.

 

[BisexualMMA]

2008, but I liked Sam Elliott in the first one.

 

[James T. Kirk]

 

[SSgt Dickweed]

2008 for sure. Didn't like the whole comic book cutscenes from the '03 one, was terribad. Ang Lee wasn't the guy to make a comic book movie IMO. I wonder why he agreed to it in the first place.

 

[Kraysla]

The Incredible Hulk (2008) was better. I liked seeing Hulk vs The Abomination.

 

[ufcfan4]

2008 because it’s just more of a fun, entertaining movie.

But if you’re looking for a more cerebral, dull, long, brooding, boring film, then ‘03 will suffice.

Maybe it’s wrong of me not to give that one a second chance, but I just remember being there in the theater and it seeming painfully long and morose.

Right from the opening scene in Brazil, you knew IH would be a fun movie. It’s not stellar. It’s certainly on the lower end of MCU films in my opinion, but it entertains.

Bana, Norton and Ruffalo have all done quite well though.

 

[HomerThompson]

2003.

 

[horc00]

Hulk '03 desert scene >>> any Hulk '08 scene >>> Hulk '03 final fight scene

Edward Norton > Eric Bana

Jennifer Connelly > Liv Tyler (by a small margin)

Both villain origin story sucks.

Hulk '03 growing into Giant Man size sucks.

Conclusion: Avengers 1 had the best Hulk.

 

[JinKazama]

2008

 

[Capt Lunatic]

Which one had the Hulk poodle because not that one.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

'03. Ang Lee's Hulk is amazing.
Ed Norton's sucks. Everything about it is inferior.
Bana > Norton (as Banner)
Connelly > Tyler (as everything)
Elliot > Hurt (as Ross)
Norton's Hulk is 10' tall and has a 32" waist. Gay.
Its too dark.
Abomination was a good idea but poorly realized.
Blonsky vs. Hulk was really cool though.

 

[SSgt Dickweed]

'03. Ang Lee's Hulk is amazing.
Ed Norton's sucks. Everything about it is inferior.
Bana > Norton (as Banner)
Connelly > Tyler (as everything)
Elliot > Hurt (as Ross)
Norton's Hulk is 10' tall and has a 32" waist. Gay.
Its too dark.
Abomination was a good idea but poorly realized.
Blonsky vs. Hulk was really cool though.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

 

[ThinkGreen]

2003. Didn’t like Norton as Banner.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

2008's better in every aspect.

Ed Norton was the best damn Bruce Banner ever.

Its too bad he was too much of a primadonna (demands too much money & hard to work with) to sign on to be in The Avengers and the rest of the MCU.

 

[CrazyN8]

I think I'm the only one who liked the 2008 Hulk movie.

 

[minute bull]

2008's better in every aspect.

Ed Norton was the best damn Bruce Banner ever.

Its too bad he was too much of a primadonna (demands too much money & hard to work with) to sign on to be in The Avengers and the rest of the MCU.

What language is this? You're a fascinating people.

 

[tmnpothead]

Neither

 

[Katsumi Yamada]

In 2003 HULK, the best part starts when he turns into the hulk in the lab facility, and ends when he turns back into Banner in San francisco.

That sequence alone makes the film better than the 2008 one.

Overall they are about even. Neither are great.

 

[the ambush]

2003 Hulk

The first superhero movie to take an intelligent storyboard approach.