Sometimes I feel like I was the only person in the world who liked the first Hulk movie.
Any critic who says that the film wasn't true to the Hulk is either ignorant, misguided or a fool. Can you imagine a whole two hour film of Hulk strutting about and smashing everything in sight? Trust me, it would get boring very quickly - you only have to look at upteen "CGI blockbusters" where more money went on the effects than the script to see why.
The Hulk movie may not have met the average man in the street's expectations of what the Hulk is - those who only know the character from half-remembered comic reading in the 60s or 70s, or perhaps vague recollections of cheaply animated Saturday morning cartoons. That's like people expecting Batman Begins to be like the 1960's Adam West TV series and complaining when it's not!
Ang Lee's film captured perfectly the themes of Peter David's extended, multiple award winning run on the Incredible Hulk comic. To put it in a simple sentance that everyone will be able to understand, "Peter David is a genius". To expand upon that, Peter David took a dull, two-dimensional comic book character that did nothing but smash things up and psychoanalysed him. He created a character for both the Hulk and Bruce Banner. He logically explained why and how the Hulk was created, and the Hulk's relationship with Banner. At the same time, he wrote a complex back story for Banner successfully reconciling not only Peter David's writing of The Hulk, but also questions that needed answering since the comic book series began. Such as "Just why was a man dedicated to non-violence working on developing weapons of mass destruction for the military?" Peter David not only introduced adult concepts into the title, but he made them the key themes of his run.
And Ang Lee's movie did the same. It wasn't perfect. Considering the script was so emotionally mature, the realisation of The Hulk did look too comic-booky. And the fight with Banner's father at the end was clearly just added on "because big budget action movies require big budget battles". And that's the irony. Ang Lee didn't create an action film. He created what he always creates – a film. A proper film - where characters drive the plot as much as the need for big action set pieces; where dialogue is just as important, if not more so, than eye candy.
I personally don't have much hope for the new Hulk film. The old Hulk may have looked too much like a cartoon, but I prefer that look to the stills I've seen of the Hulk from the new film. Cartoon wins over F-Ugly every time in my book. I also think that, while not impossible, it will be incredibly hard to create a satisfying film in the style of the 60's and 70's Hulk comics (which is what the production team seem to have decided to do after the critical and financial "failure"* of Ang Lee's approach). Finally, while I have respect for Ed Norton, the fact that stories are constantly being spread over the internet about fall outs between Norton and Marvel films about the final cut of the movie makes me think Norton's vision will be dramatically compromised.
* I say failure, but as I recall the original Hulk film easily made a profit during its theatrical and home video release, and help Marvel itself sell over three-quarters of a million dollars of Incredible Hulk movie merchandise.