Action / Sci-Fi

Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Certified Fresh 62%
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Spilled 29%
IMDb Rating 5.6 10 239935


Uploaded By: OTTO
Downloaded 344,497 times
June 21, 2013 at 10:42 PM



Jennifer Connelly as Betty Ross
Sam Elliott as Ross
Eric Bana as Bruce Banner
Nick Nolte as Father
720p.BLU 1080p.BLU
900.90 MB
23.976 fps
2hr 18 min
P/S 16 / 67
1.90 GB
23.976 fps
2hr 18 min
P/S 17 / 93

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by jamesnicholls-58600 10 / 10

The most underrated film of all time

I first watched this film in 2003 when I was a little kid, despite it being a film more fitting for mature audiences I still understood it to a certain extent and enjoyed it. When the other Hulk film came out in 2008, I initially enjoyed that one more because it had more action in it and I was still too young to appreciate the story of the Ang Lee Hulk film fully. Then a few years later I rewatched Ang Lee Hulk and realised just how great it was and how underrated it was. My point is, only intelligent people realise how great this film is, and from my life experience I can prove that personally as I didn't like this film nowhere near as much during my childhood when I was of course less intelligent than I am now. If people were smarter on average the ratings for this film would be far higher.

I thought the CGI in this film was brilliant, especially for it's day. It's quite pathetic that with the new Ruffalo Hulk in the Avengers, they have millions more dollars to spend extensive CGI work done to that and newer technology but despite that Ang Lee's Hulk still looks better in my opinion. The Hulk in this film not only looks the most ferocious out of all the Hulk incarnations from films but it's also truer to the comics as well, in this film Hulk actually grows in size the angrier he gets unlike in the other films and his colour is also more accurate to the comics, more green and in general more of a better colour. Another reason why I think the 2003 Hulk character is better is because Hulk in this film seems to far more powerful than the 2008 version and more powerful than the new one, for example I can't imagine the Hulk from this movie losing to Thanos like the Hulk from the MCU did because this Hulk actually had unlimited power and clearly got much stronger the angrier he got.

A lot of people criticise this film because it doesn't have as much action of the Hulk smashing things. But that's part of the problem, if the typical Marvel fan got what they wanted then 90% of this film would've just been non-stop action involving the Hulk, but that's simply not what intellectuals crave, certainly not in that enormous quantity, of course though if it was like that then it would be hardly any different from a typical MCU movie of today but probably even worse. I think it had a good mix of action, drama and emotion in this film. If Marvel fans want mindless action then they should go see a random Bruce Willis flick instead, this film is for smart people who appreciate the sheer emotion this film dishes out.

I think Thunderbolt Ross was far better in this than the other Hulk films. The Thunderbolt Ross in the 2008 version was pretty much straight up villain whereas the one from this film was more like an anti-hero, a grey character, which made him all the more interesting. He actually had legitimate reasons to go after the Hulk which made the film more tragic. meaningful and memorable. The acting was superb, to the extent I think all the actors/actresses did a well above average job in this film with the possible exception of Jennifer Connelly, but her great looks make up for it. I was very impressed with the anger the actors portrayed, it seemed very real and realistic nothing like the so called anger MCU characters have in the MCU films nowadays.

The action scenes were superb such as the Hulk vs mutant dogs scene, Hulk vs the army and of course Hulk vs his Dad at the end. I liked the fact some of the camera shots were like a comic book and it also made fans connect closer to Bruce at the time, as his angry mind and eyes during those comic book scenes would've been all over the place so the comic book movie scenes really do help the viewer connect with Bruce in that regard. Eric Bana's Bruce Banner wasn't so geeky compared to Norton's and Ruffalo's Banner, and I liked that aspect. The 2003 Banner also had much more of a backstory than any of the others, and it certainly turned out to be an interesting background. The 2003 Banner is a far more complex character than the others, mainly due to his background, the 2008 one and Ruffalo version on the other hand, well we hardly hear anything of their backstories at all, at least the 2003 version has plenty of backstory information available to viewers.

Last but certainly not least I would just like to say that David Banner from this movie is my favourite Marvel villain ever Very complex villain and a lot more grey than people might initially think. It's very interesting working out some of his hidden motives in the film, I recommend fans of this film to watch the film again but watch it from David Banner's perspective, it's extremely interesting. David Banner was a very power hungry villain, that's the thing he cared about the most but his love for his wife and his Son when he was a small boy (before he tried to kill him and before he wanted to harness his Son's powers for himself) has made me sympathise for him which makes all the more interesting and tragic villain. I recommend this film to anyone who has a mind and has patience.

Reviewed by smvouriot 8 / 10

surprising art film

Hulk is a very surprising film. When I first saw it when I was like nine or ten I was confused, shocked and somewhat disappointed. My expectations at the time had not been met. What I had been expecting and hoping was just endless scenes of the hulk smashing sh#t up. What I got was an art film. At the time I didn't understand or care about any of the split screens, dream sequences, etc, I was just waiting for the hulk to show up and destroy stuff.(The hulk dosen't show up till about 40 minutes into the movie, by the way.) I eventually began to get restless because it is a very slow movie and when it was over I felt very disappointed.

A few years later I bought the DVD to give it another try, and I was very surprised with how good it actually was, now that I had gotten older and could appreciate the style, acting and pretty much everything else. The acting is quite good in the film, especially Nick Nolte, who almost steals the show as Bruce Banner's father, David Banner. Eric Bana is decent as the hulk, but I prefer Mark Ruffalo as the hulk in the avengers. Unlike other movies based on comic books, Hulk actually looks like a comic book, due to the split screens. This works most of the time,as it gives the film a unique look thats different from other comic book movies.

Now to the much criticised CGI, which for me is a mixed bag. The close ups of the hulk work, because his facial expressions are well done and you can actually feel sympathy for him. However the long shots of him, especially in the desert scenes, look a bit cheesy but definitely not as bad as some critics have been saying. Apart from that the visual effects are top notch.

Overall, Hulk is a refreshing change from standard and bland superhero movies. It takes its time setting up the plot and characters, which works because you have almost fully fleshed out characters and not cardboard cut outs. The repressed memories and psychology of the hulk is much more interesting than the standard heroics of superman or captain America. So to sum it up, I wouldn't recommend this movie to young kids because there are a number of intense scenes and it is a fairly long and slow movie, so those with short attention spans won't be well rewarded. But for those who are prepared to accept that it is more an art film than an action film then you will be well rewarded.

The film isn't perfect, but every time I watch it on DVD it grows on me and I find myself wishing sometimes that more action blockbusters were like this, but then if they were I doubt they would be blockbusters.

Reviewed by BiiivAL 7 / 10

Everything turned out to be too bad ...

Few people actually realized that this is not exactly a superhero action movie. More precisely, he is not superhero. After all, the Hulk has never really been a hero. Always in exile and persecution of enemies.

And it was very skillfully shown by Eng Lee. He created what Christopher Nolan later did. As it turned out, the audience was not ready for the drama "about comics." Maybe it was simply not worth shooting this film by Eng Lee, although he portrayed the perfect drama. He showed the Hulk quite the other side.

Personally, I am a sincere fan of this film, like comics in general. All as always waited for a passing summer "militancy", which they are feeding us up to now and will do it again. Everything turned out to be too bad ...

Eric Bana did everything right, that would not say critics. He showed all the experiences of the hero as it was not in the comics, but as it would be in real life.

Jennifer Connelly in my opinion did not show anything, except for some tears. Bad.

Nick Nolty stood out most of all. He truly played the villain and father of Bruce Banner. The brightest figure in the film.

I appreciate only the game of actors, since this is not an action.

I'll put the film as a first-rate drama created by a first-rate director who later created the best drama in general (Brokeback Mountain):

Read more IMDb reviews