Why was Hulk (2003) not a bigger hit?

I loved the movie back when it came out and I love it even more today, and think that's Marvel's best movie actually, besides Iron Man. Yes, I think I like Hulk just a little better.

But for some reason, the movie is considered to be one of the worst superhero movies by many Marvel fans, and moviegoers in general, and I can never understand why.

I ask my friends and they just kind of can't explain but say it just sucks like it's obvious. But I felt it had a really good origin story, much better done than usual, and the villain is one of the better superhero movie villains in my opinion, with a really good character arc and flaws.

But what is it exactly that people do not like about this movie?

It's better than the one they used in the MCU, IMO

__________________
Still kicking and it hurts.

Yeah I think it's a lot better than the MCU one. The MCU one is not necessarily bad, but the origin story is really flimsy with unanswered questions, and the villain was just your stereotypical military macho, my #$%6 is bigger than yours villain, in comparison.

It wasn't fun. The Hulk is supposed to be fun.

The Hulk is a very sad character. I really liked the bleak direction they went with the movie, you felt so bad that he had this incurable condition he can't get rid of.

Plus it was much better than the 2008 movie, where if it wasn't for Norton's performance, it wouldn't be worth watching at all.

People just don’t appreciate a good “guy transforms into a lightning storm by chewing on an extension cord” scene like they used to.

I enjoyed it when it came out; saw nothing wrong with it at all. However, with no connection to the world of comics, if there were any niggles for fans I would be completely unaware of them. Aspects like the colour of the Hulk for example I think were raised at the time, and possibly the way the Hulk jumped, froglike across country.

Bill Bixby isn't in it.

I quite liked Norton and the whole thing of Banner trying to lie low. His time working in the factory and the clever way it goes pear-shaped. The idea seemed to be recycled for Magneto in X-Men: Apocalypse.

i kinda liked it, but it wasn t that much fun yes, like for example thor ragnarok is.

Exactly. Comic book movies should be fun in general. Marvel's current slate of films totally understands that. The makers of Hulk certainly didn't. It was long, ponderous, and slow. Hulk didn't smash anything except for two short scenes. Smashing is what he does, it's his catch phrase!

__________________
"You, me, everyone...we are all made of star stuff." - Neil Degrasse Tyson

https://shawnsmovienight.blogspot.com/

I thought Hulk did quite a bit of smashing if you actually time it. But I feel that moviegoers are being double-standardish on this cause Batman Begins had a long serious origin story, and the action didn't kick in high gear until later on, and yet that one is well liked, and Iron Man had a long serious origin story, before the action kicked in.

And the original Superman, and Man of Steel do it as well.

So why does Hulk get criticized for doing the same thing?

HULK is excellent. Not a big fan of bomic book movies, but Ang Lee did this one just right. Nick Nolte 'chewing' the scenery was a highlight.

P.S..........I'm 67 years old, and The Hulk was my favorite comoc book character as a kid.

__________________
"Bowels in, or bowels out?"

I don't think the CGI Hulk was convincing and CGI characters, especially as leads, were pretty new then. Spidey in the first Tobey Maguire film was mostly CGI and not very convincing, but at least you could relate to Peter and M.J.
Also it was promoted as being inspired by the TV series but it wasn't really like the series (which owed more to "The Fugitive" than the comic) or the comic book.

Oh okay, I didn't know it was promoted to being similar to the series, and I never saw the old series. I actually had no problem with the CGI and it's better than some movies that came before it, and I connected more with Bruce Banner and Betty Ross, than I did with Peter and M.J. in comparison.

I think Hulk is one of those movies that you either love or hate - very few people will fall in between. I'm personally not a big fan of the film, but I wasn't too crazy about The Incredible Hulk either. I liked it more than Hulk, but it's definitely a weak link in the MCU.

Would I watch Hulk if someone put it on the TV? Sure. I may not be a fan, but even I'll admit that it's a good fun film. But would I call it good? Nah.

__________________
"I am Ring-winner and Luck-wearer; and I am Barrel-rider!"

It feels very long. The hulk unaccompanied is not an appealing character to me honestly. It’s not as though the character can’t work alone though....to counter myself as there was that successful tv show (which I never watched).

I feel I may have been a little misleading. I don't recall the trailers and posters evoking the TV series, but I do remember interviews with Ang Lee or others saying it was more similar to the show. It may have been because the folks behind the film realized it was more adult in its approach and wanted to attract the TV fans.
Lee had just received acclaim for "Crouching Tiger," so I think a lot of people expected more action.
But they were coy about showing the CGI Hulk initially in publicity and after he was revealed, it wasn't well received.

I tell you what though – during the fight in the burning building I had no idea at the time that that was a CGI character. Maybe because of the slow motion? I was suitably impressed when I found out.