On a real note though, while I like this version of Bruce, I really miss the manipulative and slightly frightening version of him from Avengers. Especially the one scene where Natasha recruits him, SO sick.
he is awkward and I love that. You can see the anger in him being repressed on his face thus he did a good job I will stand up and say Mark Ruffalo is the best Hulk ever and noone else can do justice to this character like he did.
Your comment makes it obvious that you've never read a Hulk comic in your life. Ruffalo's portrayal of Banner is about the most godawful and least accurate one out there. Edward Norton's version was perfect and felt like Dr. Bruce Banner, the cold, haunted scientist on the run, was ripped straight from the comics into a movie. Bruce was never the awkward dork Ruffalo portrays him to be in the comics. Ruffalo (or at least the people writing Ruffalo's scenes) turned him from a dark and complex character to watered down comic relief. He did anything but justice to this character
@@eagle_klaw_ you do realise that bruce banner has more than one side to his personality. Edward norton's, while not my favourite portrayal of bruce showed the man on the run, suppressing almost all emotion to contain the hulk. Mark ruffalo's bruce banner showed bruce loosen up a bit, showing more of his personality and charisma. Although i am not the biggest a fan of the most recent portrayals of the character as he feels almost like a completely different character that doesn't feel like bruce banner and mostly used as comic relief, mark ruffalo's 2012 depiction i think feels like most of banner's side culminating in one personality.
I loved that last part in INFINITY WAR where he laughs and yells "You guys are so screwed now" cause in being the "Mild Mannered" Bruce Banner it doesn't mean he can't have joy and be all somber all the time. A lot of people were so into Edward Norton, but to me he was too bland as Bruce, I much prefer Eric Bana or Mark Ruffalo because under the mild manner in them you feel and see repressed anger so well which is what the Hulk is. The MCU did well with Ruffalo and he plays very good with this character because it is sort of like him in real life.
honestly hulk (2003) was very misunderstood at the time, people were expecting to be a action pack hero movie but its more about childhood truama and toxic masculinity
@@Jebuscrhistallmighty The whole Toxic Masculinity thing I don't see it, unless you are referring to Talbot and General Ross, in which case I do agree with you. As far as everything else, you are so very correct.
@@EternalRoman I’m pretty sure his dad is also another embodiment of toxic masculinity. And remember whenever they show the closed door in a flashback and instead of his dad being on the other side it’s the hulk, I may be over thinking or over analyzing but I believe that’s saying the hulk is the toxic masculinity that Bruce is repressing. Or just the stem of his anger/ trauma. But that is my opinion
I wish I got to see more of the shrewd "better not mess with him" Banner from the first Avengers movie, but him being cool with Thor and the gang is still adorable.
What the fuck are you smoking? There literally hasn't been a worse depiction of the Hulk in any movie, video game, and animation Marvel has ever made featuring him. You don't read comics and it shows
I'm definitely willing to accept this as a version of the hulk and Banner and its great in its own way, but I will always miss that we didn't get more of the Jekyll and Hyde type situation. I feel like is a missed opportunity, and while I like what they've done, I really wish that they would have done more. I really love the 1978 show, because it shows a lot of a jekyll-and-hyde dynamic, and it shows the banner really struggles, and that he can never really stay anywhere or being any meaningful relationship because everyone around him is in danger. If you can get past the dated effects, I would highly recommend that show. It can be a bit of an acquired taste, but if you watch a few episodes, you might get used to it and it might be something you really like. I didn't expect to like it, but it's not one of my favorite shows. But it just reinforces that there was so much more they could have done with the Hulk in the MCU, and it just feels really like they missed a big opportunity.
Bruce: Well, if he could do that, then he could achieve heavy-ion fusion in any reactor on the planet. Tony: Finally, someone who speaks English. Steve: ...Is that what just happened?
All Avengers fellowmates value banner... No body would against him not even Tony stark... Banner is the only person who Tony stark considers equal to him😊
Honestly Mark's Robert was add his best in the first Avengers movie, what the hell happened in the creation of the second movie that it was decided to revert Robert back to fearing transforming into the Hulk even though he has a solid grip on controlling the change? Especially in the beginning where it saddens him to hear about the bad guys getting seriously injured and/or killed when he clearly had no angst over killing all of those aliens in the first film
Ragnarok was SUPPOSED to just be a jokey film. It was to keep things light before Infinity War and Endgame. So it made sense for him to just be part of that, since he wasn't in civil war.
What if I truthfully said that I have so much freaking stress, and when someone threw a stupid piece of computer sh!t at my arm and it marked me, I may or may not have yeeted it back. The person who threw it at me reacted by backing off :) Don't mess with me
"lovable dork" are words that never should have been used to describe Bruce Banner but the MCU decided to ruin him by making him that type of character. Norton's version was 100x better for the fact that his version wasn't close to "lovable dork"
@@agasthyamavilla605 Banner being a lovable dork is like Spider-Man being a brooding, serious, Batman-like character or making Punisher crack 4th wall jokes like Deadpool. It is such an infuriating bastardization of his character and I'd love to slap whoever came up with the idea to do him that way with the biggest Hulk comic book I can find. If you read the comics, "lovable dork" are among the last words that would be used to describe him. The man is cold, dark, antisocial, and kind if an asshole sometimes. But he certainly isn't a "lovable dork". He's a terrifying mad scientist who doesn't get along with anybody
@@eagle_klaw_ Sure, but moving away from the source material isn't so bad. The dork personality sure isn't earned, but I genuinely feel like it's okay. Mark Ruffalo embodies a shy but knowledgeable scientist well. I am also (probably one of few) one who liked the Natasha-Bruce ship. Felt like one of the more unexpected but surprisingly good matchups.
@@agasthyamavilla605 strongly disagree. Moving away from the source material to an extent when it helps the story is fine. When you move away from a story to the point where you completely rewrite a characters' entire personality, it's most definitely not fine. Does Mark embody a shy scientist well? Sure. Does he embody BRUCE BANNER well? Not in the fucking slightest. His portrayal in Avengers 1 was okay because that still felt like Norton's Banner, who was about as true to Bruce Banner's actual characterization and personality in the comics as you can get. Also the Natasha-Bruce romance was by far the dumbest relationship they've ever tried to force in the MCU. They didn't even try to explain the plot holes that opens up with Bettt and there is absolutely nothing in the comics to justify or back up such a stupid ship in any way. They could have shipped Natasha with Tony, Steve, Hawkeye, or even Daredevil and had it work, but Hulk? I hope someone got fired for that. And Hulk is supposed to be in love with BETTY. If you actually gave a damn about comics or then you wouldn't be trying to justify this gross bastardization of these characters like you are, but instead you're just feeding into Disney's lazy cash grabs by people who very obviously don't give a shit about these characters
@@eagle_klaw_ jeez bud. I hoped it wouldn't go there, but kinda did, huh? Anyway, 2 months made me agree with you a lot more. I still stand by some of my points (moving away from source material not being bad) considering that Endgame (as far as i know) is not even close to what happened in the comics. But I loved the film. Had its flaws, but loved it. But I agree with you a lot more now. As much as I like what Mark Ruffalo did with Bruce Banner, they made him into a fucking joke. Agreed. If you turned into a creature that could level a city in minutes and end life on a scale hither to undreamt of, then I don't think Bruce would be a nervous, shy intellectual and rather a dark, antisocial and people-hating person that would stay away from society just to keep himself from hurting anyone. And now he's Taika Waititi's bitch, just comic relief. In one way, it makes sense that Bruce *could* be using humor as a mechanism to deal with his trauma, but it's never touched on. So yes, I agree. Bullshit.
@@WhenRatsHowl then you clearly don't know squat about The real Bruce Banner... Norton was the best,not only did Norton look exactly like the Banner but he had that darkness in him that made him perfect for the role.
@@WhenRatsHowl agreed. Nobody could play Banner as poorly as Ruffalo did. He turned him from a dark, complex, and interesting character to a pathetic joke
