Perception is ninth tenths of the bragging rights law. It’s everything, right?
As we had noted just after the opening of Ed Norton’s version of “The Incredible Hulk,” the opening week box-numbers for Ang Lee’s supposed “Hulk” “flop” in 2003 were actually higher than that of the Louis Leterrier/Marvel iteration that came out at the beginning of June (this new version did $55.4 million, Lee’s did the substantially larger $62.1 million).
But it was Lee’s version that was called a bomb and it was Marvel’s revamp that was heralded as bringing the franchise back to life, right?
Well, checking in a few weeks later and not much has changed for this new Hulk which is apparently on track to do around the same numbers or just slightly higher.
The Hollywood Reporter has weighed in echoing much of what we already said and their math supports the hypocrisy we pointed out just after it’s opening week numbers were reported.
Lee’s $245 million worldwide box office gross was dismissed as a commercial failure. So far Marvel’s new edition has taken in $126 million domestically and it’s numbers have dropped off rapidly. Last week the film dropped 49% from its previous weekend gross (taking in $4.8 million) and the Reporter suggest the numbers are falling off rapidly and the film will be lucky if it reaches $135 million mark in North America.
Then their are foreign sales of course, and action, smash ’em ups tend to translate better than any other genre internationally cause everyone understands the universality of a sweet punch to the face.
At this rate Marvel’s ‘Hulk’ 2.0 has done $221 million world wide, but total production costs, including marketing and promotion are estimated at $200 million. Not much of a recoup and the chances of it generating a sequel are looking slim.
However, the movie sequel is apparently no longer the litmus test for a successful movie “franchise” apparently. “We’re happy with the financial results, even if they (only) reach the first film’s levels,” an anonymous Marvel person told the trade. “Having a sequel is not the definition of success.”
Universal domestic distribution president Nikki Rocco remarked, “All we can say as a studio is that we are very pleased with the result.” And note, no sequel has been greenlit yet. With the Norton/Marvel relationship still up in the air, and Letterier off to do “Clash of The Titans,” the same combo looks unlikely anytime soon does this not fuck up the potential for “The Avengers” movie? We wouldn’t want to see a third new Bruce Banner now would we? Could audiences really tolerate this?
Though the foreign rollout for ‘Incredible Hulk’ is still in progress the Hollywood reasonably predicts the film could outgross Ang Lee’s “Hulk” but if so, only by a $10 million or so.
So again. The New ‘Hulk’? Pretty much a lot like the old ‘Hulk,’ at least financially (we will say that Ed Norton’s version is miles above Lee’s from a critical perspective; the first one was awful, but not for the reason’s most people suggest – we will say our original ‘Incredible Hulk’ review is a little overstated, we’d give it a B+ now). Whether that perception will change however remains to be seen as everyone has probably moved on to the next flavor of the week.
Sadly, one of the worst movies of the year thus far, the painfully mediocre “Indiana Jones and The Kingdom of The Crystal Skulls,” is the highest grossing film of the year so far having raked in over $735 million so far. Marvel’s other property, the highly successful “Iron Man,” is second having grossed $563 million thus far and yet there’s still no confirmation whether it’s director Jon Favreau will be back on board for its sequel or not.
