I am anxiously waiting for the Hulk to start playing. There is a lot of buzz around this film. One of the biggest topics is that the Hulk is completely CGI. The previews looked AWESOME. Has CGI come along enough to base a character completely on this technology?
I came across an article today asking “Who is stronger Terminator or Hulk?” in the same vane as Sienfeld asking…”Who is better, Superman or…” I think this excerpt sums it all up for ya.
Compare this with the Hulk — mild-mannered Bruce Banner transformed by rage and gamma rays into a 15-foot-tall muscled madman. In one scene from the upcoming movie, he grabs a tank by the turret, twirls and throws it far into the distance.
Let’s pause to consider this for a moment. He’d need to get that 60-ton tank moving about 170 mph to throw it 2,000 feet. Doing that in two seconds requires 100,000 hp, or the strength of a naval destroyer packed into a superhero’s body.
Although not as logical or tenacious as the Terminator — helpful qualities when you’re built to kill — the Hulk compensates for his deficiencies with pure muscle power.
Source:CNN.com - Who is stronger: Terminator or Hulk? - Jun. 19, 2003
Related Articles
2 users responded in this post
ugh! the movie looks like sh*t to me! I think they should have done the whole thing in CGI, or not used it at all. I won’t even watch it when it airs on broadcast TV.
The NY Times SLAMS The Hulk in their review today - Tall and Green, but No ‘Ho, Ho, Ho’
Leave A Reply