--- title: "Hulk: the reviews" canonical: "https://film.one/film/hulk/reviews" title_page: "https://film.one/film/hulk" critics_score: 68 critics_reviews: 11 licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # Hulk (2003): what the critics said Critics' score 68 from 11 reviews: 5 positive, 5 mixed, 1 negative. The reviews lean favourable, but agreement is stronger on Ang Lee’s visual invention than on the film as a whole. Critics repeatedly praise the comic-panel framing, split screens and attempts to give superhero action psychological weight, even when they find the results uneven. Praise for the performances centres on Nick Nolte and Jennifer Connelly, with Eric Bana also drawing approval; the more enthusiastic reviews welcome a substantial drama rather than a conventional superhero adventure. The divide concerns how well that drama works alongside the action: reservations cluster around heavy backstory, childhood trauma and an ending that strains to deliver. Variety admires the craft but finds the emotion lacking, particularly in the connection between Bruce and the Hulk. Judgements of the digital creature vary sharply too: Empire finds him convincing and central to the entertainment, while Eye for Film finds the CGI conspicuous, contributing to a broad spread of opinion. ## Slant Magazine — Nick Schager Rating 3.5/4. 18 June 2003. Schager praises the film as a visually distinctive, affecting superhero drama, though its comic-panel style eventually wears thin. He singles out Nick Nolte’s vivid, gleefully unhinged performance as a particular strength. [Read the review](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/hulk/) ## The Guardian — Rob Mackie Fi1m's normalised score 85/100 (inferred from the text). 14 November 2003. Mackie calls Ang Lee’s film one of the best comic-book adaptations, despite its box-office failure. He praises its memorable desert and San Francisco sequences and the performances, especially Nick Nolte and Jennifer Connelly. [Read the review](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2003/nov/14/dvdreviews.shopping) ## Empire — Simon Braund Fi1m's normalised score 80/100 (inferred from the text). 1 January 2000. Braund calls the film outstanding entertainment, despite an over-ambitious ending and occasional lulls. He especially praises the integrated CGI Hulk, whose larger-than-life presence makes him the star of the show. [Read the review](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/hulk-review/) ## Total Film — Total Film Rating 4/5. 18 July 2003. The review finds the film an intriguing, intelligent arthouse blockbuster, though its unusual mix may disappoint viewers expecting a conventional superhero romp. It praises Lee’s visual inventiveness and the cast’s absorbing performances, especially Eric Bana and Jennifer Connelly. [Read the review](https://www.gamesradar.com/hulk-review/) ## RogerEbert.com — Roger Ebert Rating 3/4. 20 June 2003. Ebert finds the film uneven but imaginative. He praises Ang Lee’s visual storytelling and comic-book-inspired editing. [Read the review](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/hulk-2003) ## The AV Club — Scott Tobias Fi1m's normalised score 65/100 (inferred from the text). 30 June 2003. Tobias finds the film ambitious and substantial, though it never fully reconciles its artistic vision with franchise expectations. He praises Lee’s inventive comic-book visual style, while noting that the action sequences bring life to stretches weighed down by backstory and psychology. [Read the review](https://www.avclub.com/the-hulk-1798198662) ## Time Out — NB Fi1m's normalised score 64/100 (inferred from the text). The review’s verdict cannot be determined from the available page text. No specific praise or complaint from Time Out’s critic is visible. [Read the review](https://www.timeout.com/movies/hulk) ## Radio Times — Adam Smith Rating 3/5. Smith calls the film an uneven effort unlikely to satisfy anyone. He criticizes the grim childhood-trauma subplot and says the later action feels tacked on despite its technical skill. [Read the review](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-j1gyim/hulk/) ## The New York Times — A. O. Scott Fi1m's normalised score 56/100 (inferred from the text). 20 June 2003. The headline suggests the review found the film short on comic fun. The blocked page does not reveal the critic’s fuller verdict or specific praise and complaints. [Read the review](https://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/20/movies/film-review-tall-and-green-but-no-ho-ho-ho.html) ## Variety — Todd McCarthy Fi1m's normalised score 50/100 (inferred from the text). 12 June 2003. McCarthy finds the film an ambitious, skillfully crafted attempt to deepen the superhero genre, but says it falls short emotionally. He praises the visual effects and inventive split-screen presentation, while faulting the Hulk’s weak connection to Bruce and the flat ending. [Read the review](https://variety.com/2003/film/awards/hulk-1200541141/) ## Eye for Film — Stephen Carty Fi1m's normalised score 35/100 (inferred from the text). 22 February 2009. Carty finds the film an underwhelming blend of arthouse introspection and superhero action. He praises its inventive comic-book-inspired visual style but criticizes Hulk’s conspicuous CGI appearance. [Read the review](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/hulk-film-review-by-stephen-carty) --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Our review: https://film.one/film/hulk.md