The Incredible Hulk (television series) 1978-1982

[Silver Nemesis]

My first exposure to The Incredible Hulk's pilot movie was renting the VHS from the kids section of the video. Make no mistake that wasn't misplaced there or that it crossed with the family section. I could tell right away this was no kids show when it opened with Banner's nightmare about his wife being killed in an automobile accident. It's remarkable to me how compelling the story was to me at that age and a credit to Johnston how he elevated the material from the source.

That prologue still packs a punch now. It immediately hooks the viewer and makes us sympathise with Banner, similar to how the beginning of the first John Wick movie uses the title character's personal tragedy to get us on his side. The opening sequence also establishes the psychological foundation of Banner's drive to unlock the superhuman potential hidden in his DNA. We see how that drive is rooted in past trauma and his failure to save his wife.

The grief of the prologue is later heartbreakingly echoed in the film's finale. I love the extra twist of tragedy where Banner can't remember the Hulk's memories – Elaina uses her dying breath to profess her love for Banner, but he doesn't remember her doing so because he was in Hulk mode when she said it. Then in the final scene we see him conjecturing that she might have loved him, but now he'll never know for certain. That uncertainty adds an extra note of anguish to the film's already sad ending. You seldom find writing that good in modern Marvel films.

I know many fans criticise Johnson for downplaying the more fantastical elements of the source material. And while I'm usually one for embracing comic book excess, this is one instance where the more grounded approach clearly worked. Could they have made a more comic bookish show where the Hulk regularly fought super villains? Maybe. But it would've been pretty goofy and wouldn't have had the same emotional and psychological depth as what Johnson delivered.

Johnson cited Victor Hugo's Les Misérables as an influence on the series, and the format also was clearly indebted to The Fugitive. I imagine Universal's Wolf Man movie series must have been an influence as well, as there are obvious parallels between Lon Chaney Junior's Larry Talbot and Bixby's Banner. The common factor with all of these influences in the emphasis on relatable human suffering – trauma, grief, loneliness, displacement – which I expect would've been diluted if the show had veered too far into FX-driven fantasy. The 1970s Hulk stands up precisely because it tried to be a serious science fiction show and not a goofy monster mash. It took a potentially ridiculous premise and made it frighteningly believable.

The Incredible Hulk Returns (1988) offers us a glimpse of what a more comic bookish Hulk series might have been like. And while that movie is fun (I still have my childhood VHS copy), it's hardly on the same dramatic level as the 1977 film.

I'll parrot what's been said here, in that I too believe that Kenneth Johnson elevated the source material (along with Bill Bixby, as Johnson has stated several times that Bixby was absolutely adamant that Johnson stick to the original Hulk pitch, and not allow the network to succeed the show into a failure via meddling), and origin of the Hulk. Having Banner being a individual suffering from PTSD, survivor's guilt, frustration with one self, and subsequently becoming a cursed victim of his own unwavering mania, gave the origin of the Hulk a much more profound effect and way more of a hook for general audiences to grasp than the outright hilarity the original Lee/Kirby origin provided back in 1962.

Straying from the source material, oftentimes, is frowned upon more often these days, but there are examples where I think providing a divergence from the comic book-to-live action transition actually boosts the material for the better. This is one of them.

I'm glad I'm not the only person who prefers the TV show's origin to the comic book version.

It's very telling that when it came time to introduce the MCU Hulk they opted for the origin story from the TV show over the comics. Only in the MCU I don't recall them ever referencing Bruce being a widower. In the 1977 film, the initial spark of rage that sets him on the path to becoming the Hulk is rage at himself; anger at his lack of strength, his inadequacy and inability to save his wife. That's what drives his obsessive work ethic, pushing him to recklessly experiment on himself. That unchecked rage subsequently grows and manifests in the form of the Hulk. But it all begins with that tragic car crash that took his wife away from him. The MCU Hulk, as far as I remember, doesn't have that drive.

[The Joker]

That prologue still packs a punch now. It immediately hooks the viewer and makes us sympathise with Banner, similar to how the beginning of the first John Wick movie uses the title character's personal tragedy to get us on his side. The opening sequence also establishes the psychological foundation of Banner's drive to unlock the superhuman potential hidden in his DNA. We see how that drive is rooted in past trauma and his failure to save his wife.

The grief of the prologue is later heartbreakingly echoed in the film's finale. I love the extra twist of tragedy where Banner can't remember the Hulk's memories – Elaina uses her dying breath to profess her love for Banner, but he doesn't remember her doing so because he was in Hulk mode when she said it. Then in the final scene we see him conjecturing that she might have loved him, but now he'll never know for certain. That uncertainty adds an extra note of anguish to the film's already sad ending. You seldom find writing that good in modern Marvel films.

I know many fans criticise Johnson for downplaying the more fantastical elements of the source material. And while I'm usually one for embracing comic book excess, this is one instance where the more grounded approach clearly worked. Could they have made a more comic bookish show where the Hulk regularly fought super villains? Maybe. But it would've been pretty goofy and wouldn't have had the same emotional and psychological depth as what Johnson delivered.

Johnson cited Victor Hugo's Les Misérables as an influence on the series, and the format also was clearly indebted to The Fugitive. I imagine Universal's Wolf Man movie series must have been an influence as well, as there are obvious parallels between Lon Chaney Junior's Larry Talbot and Bixby's Banner. The common factor with all of these influences in the emphasis on relatable human suffering – trauma, grief, loneliness, displacement – which I expect would've been diluted if the show had veered too far into FX-driven fantasy. The 1970s Hulk stands up precisely because it tried to be a serious science fiction show and not a goofy monster mash. It took a potentially ridiculous premise and made it frighteningly believable.

As per usual, you eloquently stated and provided much more context in why the Johnson/Bixby/Ferrigno "The Incredible Hulk" was such a game changer, and truly one of the all time greats in adapting a comic book character, to live action. Making him much more palpable to casual viewers, and not just catering to comic book enthusiasts. Which, more or less, has been completely inverted these days, being much more spectacle and formuliac rather than experimental and a conformation of restraint.

The Incredible Hulk Returns (1988) offers us a glimpse of what a more comic bookish Hulk series might have been like. And while that movie is fun (I still have my childhood VHS copy), it's hardly on the same dramatic level as the 1977 film.

Yeah, I think the nostalgia (even by 1988) of bringing back David/Hulk for a TV movie was something of a sugar high that made it a lot of fun for viewers back then. I guess each movie being essentially back door pilots for a (sorta) spin-off show was the biggest hook for the network (I guess there's no way of knowing just how much Thor/Daredevil would have interacted with Bixby's Banner/Hulk, so that's why I added the "Sorta" in there).

I don't personally recall watching Return/Trial when they originally premiered, but I can imagine for those who were children and grew up with the original series, Return/Trial/Death was like viewing a familiar world thru a different lens. Sorta like the approach of the DCAU's "New Adventures of Batman" differed from "Batman The Animated Series".

It's very telling that when it came time to introduce the MCU Hulk they opted for the origin story from the TV show over the comics. Only in the MCU I don't recall them ever referencing Bruce being a widower.

True. In a way, I kinda think due to the mixed reception of 2003's HULK directed by Ang Lee, the thinking was, "Well, let's go back to what worked." Which isn't really unlike what we get with Superman continually going back to the refuge of Donnerverse imagery and the Williams score. About as 2008's TIH got to the widower aspect, was Ed Norton's Banner was introduced as already being estranged from Betty Ross following his first Hulk-out, which she was present at and (apparently) injured from. That's about as deep as it got.

 

In the 1977 film, the initial spark of rage that sets him on the path to becoming the Hulk is rage at himself; anger at his lack of strength, his inadequacy and inability to save his wife. That's what drives his obsessive work ethic, pushing him to recklessly experiment on himself. That unchecked rage subsequently grows and manifests in the form of the Hulk. But it all begins with that tragic car crash that took his wife away from him. The MCU Hulk, as far as I remember, doesn't have that drive.

That's one of the things I do appreciate about Eric Bana's performance in HULk, was that he did a good job in evoking some sense of having repressed rage throughout the movie. Which was largely absent with Norton's and Ruffalo's versions. With the origin in the 2003 film, I guess you can say it was a balance of the Bixby version and the comic book origin. As Bana's Banner clearly has inner rage, and is oftentimes aloof and distant, but his gamma exposure isn't due to his own reckless mania, but in saving a fellow co-worker from what would be logically perceived as certain death. Giving Bruce a element of heroism without going full blown Lee/Kirby with it.

[Silver Nemesis]

That's one of the things I do appreciate about Eric Bana's performance in HULk, was that he did a good job in evoking some sense of having repressed rage throughout the movie. Which was largely absent with Norton's and Ruffalo's versions. With the origin in the 2003 film, I guess you can say it was a balance of the Bixby version and the comic book origin. As Bana's Banner clearly has inner rage, and is oftentimes aloof and distant, but his gamma exposure isn't due to his own reckless mania, but in saving a fellow co-worker from what would be logically perceived as certain death. Giving Bruce a element of heroism without going full blown Lee/Kirby with it.

It must have been ten or fifteen years since I last watched Ang Lee's Hulk right the way through. It's high time I dusted off the DVD and reappraised it. From what I remember, Lee's approach also had a strong emphasis on psychology. I felt both the 2003 and 2008 movies did a decent job of keeping the dramatic focus on the title character's internal struggles, while also presenting super powered action scenes to entertain the popcorn crowd. Neither film, from what I recollect, strayed too far from Kenneth Johnson's approach. Had Johnson had more money and resources back in the 1970s and 80s, perhaps he would have occasionally featured villains like Abomination. The two-part story 'The First' was the closest the TV series came to something like that.

I've been on a Hulk binge over the past week. I've been re-reading Greg Pak's run on the comics. Currently I'm halfway through World War Hulk, which is better than I remembered. I've also replayed Hulk: Ultimate Destruction (right now I'm stuck on the final boss fight against Abomination at the dam). And of course I re-watched the 1977 TV movie. When it comes to my preferred Hulk media, I've noticed I tend to like stories that are either very grounded or very out there. My favourite Hulk comic is Planet Hulk, yet my favourite live action Hulk is the Bixby/Ferrigno version. Is there a contradiction there?

Not necessarily. Planet Hulk is less a story about Banner than the Hulk, and the Hulk fits in with the science fantasy setting of Sakaar – a world of monsters. In such a context, Banner serves to represent something in the Hulk's psyche. In comparison, the Bixby Hulk franchise was really about Banner, who obviously fits in better on Earth than he would on Sakaar. With the Bixby series, the Hulk represents something in Banner's psyche. In short, stories about Banner work better when grounded, while stories about the Hulk work better in a more fantastical context. The Bixby series focuses on Banner, so the grounded approach works. Younger comic fans who dismiss the TV show based on the lack of Hulk action are missing the point.

[thecolorsblend]

My issue with 2003 Hulk is how it gives a bit too much away in the opening part of the film. From there, the viewer is pretty consistently 10 or 15 minutes ahead of the story.

It's not that it's a bad movie. But when the audience can arrive at the final destination before the narrative itself, you can only call that a weakness.

Enjoyable film but that's a bit of a problem with it.

[The Joker]

I felt both the 2003 and 2008 movies did a decent job of keeping the dramatic focus on the title character's internal struggles, while also presenting super powered action scenes to entertain the popcorn crowd. Neither film, from what I recollect, strayed too far from Kenneth Johnson's approach. Had Johnson had more money and resources back in the 1970s and 80s, perhaps he would have occasionally featured villains like Abomination. The two-part story 'The First' was the closest the TV series came to something like that.

Yeah, it's kinda of a shame that Johnson didn't just go with another body builder like Lou, and have the villainous Hulk in "The First" be colored red. As, according to Johnson himself, not being a fan of the comic, didn't really understand why the Hulk was green and not red. Apparently, he brought this up to Stan Lee, but Stan (thankfully) was adamant that the Hulk remain green. Had Johnson went with his idea for the bad Hulk, we might've had a Red Hulk appear in the comics waaaay before it actually happened (2008-ish I believe).

To me, the 2003 HULK kinda made it a point to differentiate itself from the Bixby series. At least to some extent. Gone was the loner/fugitive aspect. Gone was the light green eyes before Banner transforms into the Hulk. No 'Lonely Man' melody theme to be had. Outside of the Ferrigno cameo, only the classic, "Don't make me angry, you wouldn't like me when I'm angry" line was incorporated, and it wasn't even in english.

Now with TIH in 2008, a lot of that Johnson stuff was brought back. If even just briefly. We even got a blink-and-you'll-miss-it Bill Bixby cameo as he appears very briefly on a tv, and (I believe), Jack McGee is brought in, only as a college student rather than a investigative reporter, and essentially names "The Hulk" in the MCU.

I've been on a Hulk binge over the past week. I've been re-reading Greg Pak's run on the comics. Currently I'm halfway through World War Hulk, which is better than I remembered. I've also replayed Hulk: Ultimate Destruction (right now I'm stuck on the final boss fight against Abomination at the dam). And of course I re-watched the 1977 TV movie. When it comes to my preferred Hulk media, I've noticed I tend to like stories that are either very grounded or very out there. My favourite Hulk comic is Planet Hulk, yet my favourite live action Hulk is the Bixby/Ferrigno version. Is there a contradiction there?

Sometimes you feel like a nut. Sometimes you don't.

I get what you mean though. I remember really liking Bruce Jones' Hulk run with "Return of the Monster", which kinda brought in a very X-Files-ish take on the Hulk. This was shortly after 9/11, and it was somewhat of a refreshing take to have such deterrence on Banner hulking out in every issue, and when he did, the depiction was like a event happening, along with a element of horror. There was a story that featured the Absorbing Man that was being published right when HULK 2003 was being released, and though it kinda made Absorbing Man a bit too OP, I liked it.

Not necessarily. Planet Hulk is less a story about Banner than the Hulk, and the Hulk fits in with the science fantasy setting of Sakaar – a world of monsters. In such a context, Banner serves to represent something in the Hulk's psyche. In comparison, the Bixby Hulk franchise was really about Banner, who obviously fits in better on Earth than he would on Sakaar. With the Bixby series, the Hulk represents something in Banner's psyche. In short, stories about Banner work better when grounded, while stories about the Hulk work better in a more fantastical context. The Bixby series focuses on Banner, so the grounded approach works. Younger comic fans who dismiss the TV show based on the lack of Hulk action are missing the point.

I can only imagine what you really thought of Thor Ragnorak and how Planet Hulk was adapted there. I remember being so very disappointed with Thor Dark World, that I actually thought Ragnorak was good when I was walking out of the theater. The more it set in though however, the less and less I care for it. Just another great storyline greatly diminished in favor for quips and chuckles. Gotta feed the normie crowds, and that's where the money is at.

[The Joker]

My issue with 2003 Hulk is how it gives a bit too much away in the opening part of the film. From there, the viewer is pretty consistently 10 or 15 minutes ahead of the story.

It's not that it's a bad movie. But when the audience can arrive at the final destination before the narrative itself, you can only call that a weakness.

Enjoyable film but that's a bit of a problem with it.

Some people I've spoken to were really put off by all the 'battle' between Bruce and his father, David. Basically leaning too much into symbolic with the outline of figure in clouds, and ultimately anti-climatic. I wonder had David turned into a Maestro-like Old Man Hulk, or even a evil Gray Hulk, and the battle been more of a summer popcorn spectacle crowd pleaser, would the film been more warmly received?