Hulk was an overly-long, boring film with far too few action sequences, and those that there were lacked any real punch. Considering that the film was shot this century, the production and acting quality feels like it was a low-budget mid-90's affair - and I was watching a remastered version. In fact it looked akin to the rubbishy B-movie travesties that you'd see on Scy-Fy Channel, although thankfully the acting and direction (apart from the stupid split-screen bits that just looked cheap and tacky) was at least a little bit better, and there was no sped-up footage. Unfortunately, even if they'd cut the length of this film in half, it would still have been too long and boring, but still have been able to have all the same content. [spoiler]Additionally, after they'd unleashed all manner or military firepower on "The Angry Man" (as he was nicknamed in this film) in the desert, and realised that he was totally impervious to bullets and even high-power missiles - all of which served only to make him even more angry, what was the point of subsequently deploying exactly the same arsenal against him when he was in the middle of the city? "T-Bolt", presumably an experienced army general, would surely see that as a totally futile strategy that would just result in the deaths of hundreds of innocents? Surely not acceptable collateral damage? Thankfully, Banner's girlfriend Betty stepped in with the practical, common-sense plan which was to just calm him down instead of aggravating him. Which worked like a dream, even if she did backstab him later to allow his capture.[/spoiler] This was by far the worst Marvel Universe film I have ever seen, and I really wouldn't recommend watching it, despite an impressive desert dash and a couple of half-decent fight scenes in the latter half.

I can only hope that the 2008 'reboot' - The Incredible Hulk - that was actually a Marvel Studios production and an official part of the MCU saga, is a vast improvement on this half-baked cash pit of a film.