And here I was worried that I'd have nothing to debate about for awhile, I'll at least give you credit for that
Or you can take a blue and gray Batman and turn him entirely black because there's no need for the blue and grey and black works so mcuh better in a movie.
Exactly, it does, and there was a point to doing it,
in the context of the film. It's not like a visual reference for people that may not understand the angrier the Hulk gets the stronger he gets, so let's make him 15 ft tall to help them out
IF Batman truly existed, and he operated at night, it makes sense for him to dress in black, not bright blue. There is no need for the Hulk to grow, he gets stronger from anger and that's really all there needs to be to it.
I was not asking if Hulk must be green in a movie adaptation.
I asked if there's an inherent need for the Hulk (as a character, not as in an adaptation of the comics) to be green.
Hulk could have stayed gray as originally conceived. And we know it wasn't any "need" what made Stan lee to make Hulk green. It was a practical decision because the printing machine wouldn't make a good gray.
THAT unnecessary the green it was from an artistic or narrative point of view.
Ang Lee had better reasons to make his Hulk growing than a defective printing machine.
No, he really didn't. To compare the merits of changes in comics to that of movies is apples and oranges, contrary to your belief, my whole argument
IS NOT that the Hulk growing isn't a part of the comics. It's that it doesn't make sense to include such a change when it doesn't serve purpose. On the other hand, I liked the fact that he made David Banner a superpowered being, I would've liked something other than a knock-off Absorbing man, but I enjoyed it, like I enjoy Nolan's Joker, so whether or not it ties into the comic book has nothing to do with it for me.
To you, him growing allows him to break out of the foam rubber, and smash helicopters and all that, I get that part. My stance is that, once he's the Hulk, he needs no further transformation to accomplish the same thing, him grabbing a helicopter at 10 ft wouldn't look any worse than him doing it at 15, or 20 or 30 ft. His main power is his anger making him stronger. I feel he shouldn't have to grow any bigger than he already is to achieve whatever he needs to.
I'll quote myself:
"Visually, the growing Hulk works as a depiction of how the madder he gets the stronger he gets the less human he turns."
"the size-changing not only depicted visually a creature who the angrier he is the less human he looks, but it also saved Hulk from both the hulk-dog biting his shoulder and that foam-rubber the military used against him when talbot was about to drill Hulk's head."
So yes, it serves a purpose, both narratively and visually.
Once again, why is a visual depiction necessary? It isn't, if he gets angrier he gets stronger, it's really quite simple. He shouldn't have to grow to break out of anything, he should've gotten more angry, like he did, and break out accordingly.
So if the Hulk has ridiculous aspects that are in the comics, you're ok with it.
It is not being ridiculous what disturbs you, it is if it wasn't in the comics before.
That said, you have to admit how general auidiences had problems with Hulk jumping miles. And well, that comes directly from the comics. So it seems people won't accept everything from the coimics either.
Once more, that was never my argument, like I stated above, I like all kinds of changes in plenty of movies that deviate from the comics,
when it makes sense to do so, or if it's
better than what's originally there. I like the new Watchmen ending, Nolan's Joker, Spidey with no webshooters, I could go on and on. But they all IMO either improved on the original concept, or were just better ideas. The Hulk growing in order to gain more strength is not one of them.
And to your other point, it's hard for general audiences to accept alot from the Hulk, in his truest form. So why would you go ahead and make it even more difficult by making him almost 20 ft tall like he's King Kong? Speaking of which.......
Yes, that's why people laugh at King Kong. I mean, a 20 feet gorilla/monster? That's probably a "ridiculously proportioned" ape. It's hard enough to get people to buy into a 10 ft monster to begin with, you make him 20 ft tall and you run the risk of making him look really ridiculous.
Don't they see that a 10 feet gorilla is much more acceptable for audiences to get.
And don't make me start with Godzilla.
So I get that somewhere between 10 and 20 feet there's a magic point where things change from great to ridiculous. You're to state exactly where. I wait for your answer.
King Kong and Godzilla are not at all any part human, and they're not supposed to be 10 ft.
They were originally conceived as city destroying giants. Making Hulk their size is like making them 6 ft tall, it wouldn't make much sense would it? Would you accept a 7 ft Godzilla? If not, tell me why, and then explain why making Hulk 20 ft makes even a little bit more sense? The Hulks strength is derived from anger, not size or height, him growing is irrelevant to his proportional strength and the character himself.
Or maybe a visual stimulus will make them get that a bigger monster is naturally able to do bigger destruction.
I'm not talking about how it works in the context but what's the NEED for that change? Since you asked about the need for the growing Hulk.
I can argue the need for the growing Hulk (read above).
What can you argue in favour of the organic webshooter's NEED?
Visual Stimulus? I understand some people aren't the smartest, but if this isn't the easiest concept to understand of all superheroes I don't know what is.
As far as Spidey goes, its real simple, if we are to believe that this spider has infused Parker with the ability to climb walls, have strength, and a spider-sense, then shouldn't it stand to reason that he also be able to produce webs too? He can do everything else, why not that? And it doesn't matter how a real spider produces them, obviously its not through a wrist, we are talking about comic book characters here. It's the idea that the Hulk needs any extra boost is my problem.
Once again, we are to believe that a man has transformed into a powerful beast, one of the strongest beings known to the earth, I think people can believe he can break out of foam rubber or destroy a helicopter standing at 9-10 ft too.
That said, real spiders can crawl walls, yes, but the way they produce spiderwebs is not out of their wrists exactly. And they take quite a long time to produce a single thread.
So, what sense does make to have Peter shooting webs from his wrists like he does? It is not accurate to either comic book or real spiders in nature. Not to mention it serves absolutely no narrative or visual purpose in either of the movies.
Any possible purpose or need for the organic webshooters?
Just check above to the previous answer
But talking about the context I can actually paraphrase you:
Yeah, but in the context of a movie, Hulk probably could keep growing, if gamma rays make him grow into the Hulk because of rage why not keep growing because of rage if he's still irradiated by gamma rays?
Exactly, why didn't he? Why wasn't he 1000 ft tall by the end of the movie? I'll tell you why, because there wasn't any real point to it in the first place, Ang just wanted to do it like he just wanted the screen transitions, nothing more than that. His final battle with his father, he was overpowered easily, and he didn't grow at any time. There wasn't anything consistent about it in the whole film other than being thrown in when Ang figured it would look cool to do so, and therein lies my issue
It wasn't because some people wouldn't understand it. Same with glowing eyes.
Glowing eyes were there bacause of the Tv series. Growing Hulk was there because of a visual depiction of his strenght. The same as Banner gets angrier and stronger by growing into the Hulk, the Hulk keeps growing according to the same principle; he keeps getting angrier and stronger.
No, the
white eyes to show the start of the transformation into the Hulk was from the TV show, and once again, was a good idea that built on the original. The
glowing eyes from TIH movie was unnecessary as well, why should his eyes glow
even brighter than they already are to show the same thing? Once again, the madder Hulk gets, the stronger Hulk gets, why is that so hard to understand or get across onscreen?
Yes I can. I can name a couple of purposes the growing Hulk actually had in the movie. That gives the device sense.
I'm yet to hear why a traditionally giant monster turns "ridiculous" by being taller.
The first Hulk was barely taller than a human being. After a while they decided to make him bigger. Did it mean to turn him into a ridiculous proportioned monster?
The thing is how we back up our opinions.
To label something as ridiculous or having no purpose because it's an opinion is quite easy. I accept it. But now let's back that up please. And by proving it, not merely repeating it.
To you it might, once again its an opinion and your entitled to it, but your not going to discredit mine at all. You haven't proven anything, you just stated the scenes where the size change took place, which I already know, as I've seen the film too. That doesn't make it a good idea in my personal view, however. Furthermore, everything you've said over these last couple of days has been backed up, or refuted, so It may seem like repeating to you, but I'm obviously not stating my stance clear enough, so I say it again. And if we are to do this dance another time, I promise you'll hear some of the same things once more...
.
