Ever since three months ago, I have heavily praised Ang Lee’s Hulk (2003) and Eric Bana as Bruce Banner because it is very psychological and deep. However, since 2008, Marvel Studios did Hulk-related films just for the money, not for the art.
While Ang Lee’s masterpiece showed all of the psychology inside a man with repressed memories, Marvel was so ignorant of Ang Lee’s interpretation that the next two Ang Lee adaptations are currently gone except for my future scripts for Universal only.
In 2008, Edward Norton played Bruce Banner in The Incredible Hulk (2008), which is nothing more than an excuse for money as well as Mark Ruffalo’s wooden portrayal of Bruce Banner in subsequent Marvel Cinematic Universe films including The Avengers (2012), Iron Man 3 (2013), Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) and Thor: Ragranok (2017) as in the picture above.
The fundamental flaw in the Marvel Cinematic Universe interpretation of Bruce Banner is that he is not dealing with his brain but simply dealing with anger which is not enough. Even though fan favorite villains and allies appear in the universe, they lack the depth that James Schamus’ 2003 script had. For example, the Absorbing Man/Carl Creel appeared in Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. (2013) but was completely forgettable compared to the similar David Banner from Ang Lee’s film. Also, Liv Tyler’s and William Hurt’s performances as Betty and General Ross felt very off compared to Jennifer Connelly and Sam Elliott.
In short, Ang Lee intended his version for the art and Marvel did theirs for just the money and the fans.
It would be very generous of Marvel to reconsider my continuations of Ang Lee’s interpretation after the next two Avengers films, for now.