The Incredible Hulk (2008) (***1/2)

It’s been only five years since Ang Lee took the Marvel Comics character to the big screen for the first time, but Universal Pictures wanted more green, so they’ve tried again with Louis Leterrier (The Transporter) as the director and a script by X-Men’s Zak Penn, with an uncredited assist by star Edward Norton. At least artistically, they’ve succeeded. Lee’s Hulk was an “origin story,” but this one takes care of that part with an opening-credits montage. We then find fugitive scientist Bruce Banner (Norton) on the run in Brazil, where he does menial labor, practices relaxation techniques to prevent himself from turning into his angrier, greener, meaner giant self and pines for fellow scientist Betty Ross (Liv Tyler), who’s back in the USA.

Leterrier and Penn keep us waiting for over half an hour waiting for that first transformation, but it’s worth it. Whereas Lee’s Hulk was big, bouncy and cartoonish, the one here is merely bulky and fearsome, aided in no small way by the sound effects. Comparing this to spring ’08’s other great action fantasy, the alter-ego battle probably goes to Robert Downey’s Tony Stark, who has a better backstory and a wry sense of humor. But in the superhero scenes, Hulk easily vanquishes Iron Man. (I leave aside the question of whether the destructive Hulk, who get is, precisely, a superhero.) The climactic battle, in fact is similar in both movies, but Leterrier really knows how to stage an action sequence. The story also was reminiscent of the original King Kong, with Tyler in the Fay Wray part, the only one who understands the beast (except for Banner) himself, and William Hurt as a general leading those who want only to bring him down. The finale is different of course—the King Kong producers weren't concerning themselves with preserving the possibility of sequels. So instead of the Empire State building, Hulk unlooses his rage in Harlem. His foe (Tim Roth) is Hurt’s man on the ground, a borderline-crazy soldier who volunteers to capture Banner and becomes transformed in his zeal. This is mainstream filmmaking at its best.

IMDB link

viewed 6/14/08 at Moorestown; reviewed 6/15–23/08

City of Men (***1/4)

A follow-up of sorts to the acclaimed City of God, a gritty drama set in the slums of Rio, this tells the story of two best friends turning 18. Growing up without a father in a favela called Dead End Hill, one searches for his while the other already has his own toddler of his own to contend with. Unlike most slums, the Hill, adjacent to a popular beach, looks beautiful from afar; only up close do the ramshackle buildings become clear. The place, already featured in a television series created by the directors of City of God, is almost as much a part of the story as the characters. The two friends spent much of the series steering clear of criminals, but here cannot avoid the crossfire as rival gangsters fight to be king of the Hill.

Despite that plot and the similar setting, this has a gentler feel than City of God. Though it realistically depicts the criminality and poverty that affects slums around the world, it’s not nearly as downbeat (or violent) overall. I don’t think people will be blown away by this movie the way many were by City of God, but they’ll leave the theater feeling more hopeful. The overall story arc is a familiar one, yet there was a surprise or two.

IMDB link

viewed 2/26/08; reviewed 2/29/08

House of Sand (***3/4)

--> --> ? Having been led by her husband across the windy, barren landscape of Northeastern Brazil to a nearly unpopulated coastal area in 1910, a woman (Fernanda Torres) struggles to find a means to leave, or to accommodate. The only other inhabitants are her mother and a few ex-slaves and their descendents. Brazilian star (and 1999 Oscar nominee) Fernanda Montenegro, who is the mother of Torres, plays the same role in the movie. As time goes by, the roles of the mother and daughter shift.

+ This is an absolutely beautiful movie, both in the story it tells and the stunning way the landscape is filmed. I see a lot of movies where the characters’ lives look more fun than mine, but this isn’t one of one of them. Yet other people’s boredom can become compelling when distilled into a two-hour drama. In the way House of Sand observes its main character dealing with enforced isolation, it reminded me of Cast Away, which I loved. As with that movie, when it skips ahead in time I felt almost cheated by not seeing what happened in the meantime. I don’t want to overextend the comparison, because in other ways the movies are very different. There’s no Tom Hanks talking to a volleyball. There’s not much talking at all, which is something I liked in this case. And the time period covered is far longer. When news comes of the outbreak of the Great War, it’s already ended. In a short time, this movie transports you to a place and time when it was possible to be that isolated. The ending is simple and cathartic.

- I did wonder what the woman did all day when she wasn’t scheming to leave. However, I think these parts of the story are intentionally left for the viewer to fill in.

= ***3/4 Not quirky minimalist like the movies of Jim Jarmusch (Broken Flowers), but haunting minimalist, sort of like those of South Korea’s Ki-duk Kim (3-Iron, Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter... and Spring), this may not be a movie for everyone. It’s not as depressing as it may seem, but there’s no laughs either. Still, I found it a moving piece about the way that the choices we make, and the choices life makes for us, shape our lives.

IMDb link