Why did Hollywood think it was necessary to remake a perfectly fine movie (Ang Lee's Hulk) made only a five years ago? I loved that movie: great entertainment, heavy human drama, stylish cinematography—a good movie. I wasn't even fond of the Marvel Comic character "The Hulk" before the 2003 film, but director Ang Lee made me a fan.

I'm a sucker for awesome visuals, and Lee's Hulk was like a moving comic book, with multiple panels on the screen, cool camera work, and a thought-provoking story. But many folks I know (males, mostly, and comic book fans especially) hated Lee's Hulk because they thought there was too much emphasis on the love story which almost made the movie a "chick flick." I vehemently disagreed of course, causing many a heated debate over coffee and pie about the "harboring anger and letting go of daddy issues" that seethed beneath the stylish surface.

And now Marvel Comics seems to be crying out, "Just kidding, do over!", making a sequel-yet-remake based on the big green character created by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby, starring academy-award nominated (and sellout?) Edward Norton as the titular character in The Incredible Hulk.

Norton is Dr. Bruce Banner, a brilliant scientist who experiments with some really dangerous, yet possibly disease-curing, radiation technology and accidentally poisons himself, triggering a horrible side effect every time he gets angry that causes him to become an incredible monstrosity with green skin and a hot temper.

While in this hulkish rampage, he accidentally injures his scientist girlfriend, Betty (Liv Tyler), and destroys much of their laboratory before fleeing from the US government to South America. This is all quickly and visually explained in a clunky intro montage, beginning the story with Banner in Brazil, trying to create a cure for his green-gene poisoning. The rest is reminiscent of TV's The Incredible Hulk (1978-1982) series, with Banner as a hitchhiking man on the run, making most of the movie a big chase scene by land, sea, and air. Oh, and along the way, there's a bit of explosion, dialogue, and a climactic battle between the Hulk and a Hulk-clone-gone-wild called Abomination (Tim Roth).

Don't get me wrong; the movie's actions scenes probably won't disappoint, seeing as there are many thrilling scenes of loud and mindless destruction of city streets among places like Virginia and the poverty-stricken shacks of Brazil. And I do expect some fun action in a movie based on a Marvel comic book; but I usually hope the story closes the deal, making it a satisfying summer blockbuster. In this case, I was disappointed that Norton's character doesn't do much reflection on the "beast within." Bruce learns some techniques to quell and control his anger from a martial arts instructor, but the deeper, spiritual aspects of human nature are brushed aside.

The small spiritual voice of reason in the movie seems to come from Betty, Bruce's girlfriend. She speaks little tidbits of truth about Bruce's condition. When Betty tries to be supportive of Bruce's condition, she says that they can work together to help him control the hulk. But Bruce responds, "I don't want to control it; I want to get rid of it."

Continue: 1 2