Understand Strength through Hulk movie

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 19 Jun 2003, and now archived in the Forum Library.

moon_mermaid	19 Jun 2003
I have watched the Hulk movie last night, and about half-way of the movie, the image of Strength Card (Robin Wood) popped up in my mind. In Robin Wood, the card is showing a tenderly looking maiden touching a lion's jaw gently. The lion sits calm and relax beside her. Through the movie, I understand the meaning of the card and want to share with you. Bruce = the ego / conscious. He tries very hard to deal with his childhood haunting memories and the beast, Hulk, inside him by suppression. Hulk = manifestation of human’s dark side, the lion in the card. Bruce’s sorrow, fear and loneliness triggered this beast. Bruce tried to fight it by suppression and repression, but this only got him overtaken by the beast. The other people tries to use force to take out this beast, this only makes with the beast more angry and powerful. Betty (Bruce’s girlfriend) = unconscious. Betty knows Bruce, though she may not have a in-depth understanding about Bruce, but she is not afraid to get close to him, face the beast. She accepts Bruce / Hulk and trying to help Bruce / Hulk. Bruce (at the end of the story) = superconsciousness. He finally understands and accepts the beast inside him and his childhood memories. He has found his way of life and when necessary he may calls Hulk to help him. The dark side has found a way out, which has turned into strength itself. Just like the lion, if you can tame it, accept it and understand it, it can protect you, if not, it will bite you. Process of getting real strength = lots of confusion and struggle. See how many cars, buildings, military weapons got destroyed by Hulk. :) Bruce’s father = the dark side not only overtake this man, it has distorted his ego / conscious. This may not true to you, but just find that it is interesting to understand the meaning of a card through an entertainment. Maybe, all the cards are out there, go and experience them in your ways. Cheers! moon_mermaid

Thirteen	20 Jun 2003
I'd go along with this...and not to undercut a very thoughtful examination of the Strength card (I think your analysis excellent, in fact).... However, I thought the movie was dreadful and I'm not sure I want to give it credit for depth. All those split screens had the subtilty of a hammer ("Look! I'm split! Part of me is monster, part man! Get it? Get it? If you don't, keep watching. The screen's going to be split again and again for the next 2 hours! Oooo, look! Reptiles! Reptile brain! Get it? Get it? Green? Reptiles? reptile brain? And growth too! Get it? get it?"). And that's just one of a long list of problems I had with this film. Then again, I wonder if I should even post this. Movies are so subjective, and I have this fear of a dozen replies telling me I'm crazy because it's such a wonderful movie. Well, maybe I am crazy. Just please don't tell me I didn't "get it." My head is hurting with all the "Get it? Get it?'s" that were nailed into my skull by the director.

Major Tom	20 Jun 2003
An excellent review of the film and analysis of Strength. Bravo! Quote: Originally posted by moon_mermaid all the cards are out there, go and experience them in your ways. Thirteen - :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: There must be some utility in a direct approach. :laugh:

Thirteen	20 Jun 2003
Quote: Originally posted by Major Tom There must be some utility in a direct approach. :laugh: There's direct and then there's anvil-from-the-sky squashing the viewer like Elmer Fudd in a bugs bunny cartoon. This was anvil, piano and a safe!

galadrial	21 Jun 2003
A couple of "oldies but goodies" movies you might enjoy moon_mermaid (if you haven't already seen them) are "A Man for All Seasons" and "Inherit the Wind". "A Man for All Seasons" pits the positive side of the Hierophant archtype (embodied by Sir Thomas Moore) against the negative side of the Emperor archtype (exemplified by Henry the VIII). A delightfully weaselly minor character is a living 7 of Swords. In "Inherit the Wind" a negative side of the Hierophant archtype (a bible literalist who wants creationism taught in schools) argues in court with the Justice archtype itself (in the form of the lawer arguing for the right to teach the theory of evolution). There is a great scene at the end where the Justice lawyer picks up the Bible in one hand and Darwin's "Origin of Species" in the other and "weighs" them. He then slaps them together and throws them in his briefcase. There is another weaselly minor character in this movie; he is a journalist who refuses to become engaged in the unfolding drama, not to retain his journalistic impartiallity, but because he is only there to sensationalize the case. The Justice lawyer accuses him, "you've never pushed two words together except to make an explosion." The negative of the Knight of Swords, methinks.

Kistarr	28 Jun 2003
I saw the movie last Sunday and although I didn't care that much for it. The screen splitting and the fact that it took so LONG to develop, kind of bugged me, but it was better than I thought it would be and so wasn't a complete waste of money. I love your analogy! It would also work along those lines with 'Beauty and the Beast'. I have never thought about movies as having Tarot card themes...only songs. Cher's 'If I Could Turn Back Time' sounds like the 5 of Cups to me. Evanscene's 'My Immortal' is lurking in my mind but I can't pinpooint the card yet. Gotta focus! :D

rota	28 Jun 2003
Big comics fan here -- since I was a mere sprat in the early sixties. In fact, I jumped to 'Wonder Woman' and 'Justice League' from the 'Dick & Jane' readers. I may have actually learned to read through comics... Anyway - 'Hulk'. for me, wasn't all that Incredible. In fact, it was a big disappointment. I mean, half an hour goes by before anything gets smashed! What's that about? I don't go to these films for the pseudopsychology -- I just wants to see stuff blowed up! I'm glad to hear it made all its money back, because it means that there'll be more Marvel Comics films. (I'd love to see Galactus and the Silver Surfer in a movie! Or The Living Planet! Or the Fantastic Four and Annihilus! But I digress...) And I'm breathlessly anticipating the 'League of Extraordinary Gentlemen' film adaptation, since the comic is so extraordinarily good. Except for 'Promethea', there is no better comic on the racks today. Any comic readers here who haven't gawped at this title?... Well, you should! Still, (and unlike the reviewers above) I rather liked the splitscreen material. Yes, yes, it was a pathetically transparent attempt to graphically portray schizophrenia -- granting you that. Sledgehammer symbolism. But I thought it went some way toward making this into a comic-book movie, for two reasons. One: a comic is read as a gestalt -- you can look backward and forward on the page, seeing all the pictures and words together as a single composition. A movie isn't read that way -- it unfolds one frame after another; there's no sifting back and forth in time. In this film, the splitscreen work functions as a replacement for that component of a comic. Second: the splitscreens also function as the rectangular panels found in most comics, reinforcing this as a comicbook film.

Thirteen	29 Jun 2003
Quote: Originally posted by rota In this film, the splitscreen work functions as a replacement for that component of a comic. Second: the splitscreens also function as the rectangular panels found in most comics, reinforcing this as a comicbook film. Oh, my gosh. I missed that entirely! Not. Sorry, but correlating the split screens to comic book panels was, to me, just one more hammer blow. Saw it right away, and was not impressed. As for LXG...They've added in Dorian Gray and a 20-something Tom Sawyer (which doesn't work at all if you examine the time-table; Tom would be something like 60 years old!)--moved the story up to I think 1910, and made it a Connery movie. I.E. HE is the central character. All the others are there to support him, like back-up singers in a band. At least that's what I've heard. Doesn't sound to me like they quite "got" the book. Could be wrong. But Moore's work is not easily translated to movies. Witness "From Hell."

Minos	29 Jun 2003
In my interpretation, Betty would equal Strength (i.e. BABALON), the maiden whose continual deception by the God in beastly form is the world's salvation. Bruce at the end of the movie would be a Master of the Temple, who has consented to shed every drop of his blood in the cup of BABALON. Perhaps even the charioteer, who bears Our Lady's Cup, full of the blood of the Saints. Bruce's father would be a Black Brother. Bruce before the end of the movie would be an Exempt Adept, or perhaps a Babe of the Abyss, making his first tenuous steps over the realm of Choronzon, not yet ready to forsake the aid of his Holy Guardian Angel. The color of the Hulk's skin is Green, the color of Venus, meaning that the constraints of ordinary humanity may be overcome only by LOVE.

rota	30 Jun 2003
"As for LXG...They've added in Dorian Gray and a 20-something Tom Sawyer (which doesn't work at all if you examine the time-table; Tom would be something like 60 years old!)--moved the story up to I think 1910, and made it a Connery movie. I.E. HE is the central character. All the others are there to support him, like back-up singers in a band. At least that's what I've heard. Doesn't sound to me like they quite "got" the book. Could be wrong. But Moore's work is not easily translated to movies. Witness "From Hell."" +++++++++++ It's so hard to do a good comicbook movie! I'm amazed they happen at all. Any book/movie adaptation has the inevitable problem of comparisons. In much the same way, novelizations of movies are rather lackluster. I haven't seen 'League of Extraordinary Gentlemen' yet, but I still hold out hope... 'X men 2' wasn't horrible!

Thirteen	30 Jun 2003
Quote: Originally posted by rota 'X men 2' wasn't horrible! Oh, by no means. X-Men 2 and Spidermen were both extraordinary! True to the comics in every way, good tight stories, great acting. It helps enormously to get a directors who really love, study and understand--really, really understand--the material and are willing to fight any studio folk who might try to water it down. Then again, part of the X-Men sucess is a bit of raw luck. Hugh Jackman got picked as Wolverine at the last minute when the studio's first choice for the part couldn't do it. That was the key role of the movie and good as the script was, I wonder if it would have held up if Wolverine hadn't been so perfectly cast.

HOLMES	02 Jul 2003
DAMN IT WAS GOOD. the only thing missing was for a villian for the hulk to fight which is what i really wanted to see. but they changed it into a man trying to control his inner demon which was dealt with through many comics with the hulk. two comics that i saw in particular popped into my mind when i saw the hulk comic. in the first comic i recall, the grey hulk and the bruce banner were in the mind of the hulk (i forget how they got there, some supervillian probaly put them there or something heeh) and they were trying to find their way out. (the grey hulk at the time was a higher version of the HULK SMASH PUNY HUMAN hulk, at this time he was a gangster and had a personality). they opened up this big green gate. and both their eyes went all big. and they said "QUICK CLOSE IT ". i saw that in the dreams where the hulk was , and the scene with the mirror especially. in the second comic book that came to mind, the hulk and thor were scrapping like crazy, and hulk throw a big train at thor. thor came out and he had enough and was prepared to fight to the death (no one treats the god of thunder that way after all ) . but the hulk was all hulked out and said hulk doesn't want to fight anymore and simply jumped away. and thor said it took him to stop the fight. and was embarrased and ashamed for falling to depths. (the hulk after all just wanted to be left alone). that i saw when betty calmed down the hulk. and he turned into bruce again. the other thing i liked in the movies, is hulk despite being violent , was able to control it *it was alwasy contended in the comics that bruce subsconcious controlled the hulk*. he shook the tank so the solider falled out. he bent the tanks gun to curve toward the solider (i loved that part). he saved the bridge. he saved betty from the dogs. it was very hulk behavior :O). one i don't recall tabot being such an bad word in the comics. two i don't recall mr ross being such a good guy. three where was rick jones *i missed that guy name who bruced saved * four in the 60 the fear was nuclear bombs in the 2000s the fear is dna testing (clones) and nuclear bombs. so they had to throw the dna manipulation in there. in the movie they contended the gamma radiation released the inner hulk caused by the dna. in the comics they contended the raidation changed the dna so much that there was no cure (rom couldn't even change the hulk back but was able to change back other cancer patients who was affected by gamma radiation ). so my two biggest disappointments was while there was a explosion, there wasn't a nuclear explosion, where bruce saved rick jones live. for rick jones was such a primodol character later in the marvel world, teamin with rom, captain marvel and captian americal. as for the future of marvel comics, punisher comes out next year, and there is for certain a fanastic four coming, yay . i loved the split screen, for it reminded so much of the comics i loved it. (which is why i go to the movies to see the comics come to life )

The Understand Strength through Hulk movie thread was originally posted on 19 Jun 2003 in the Using Tarot Cards board, and is now archived in the Forum Library. Read the active threads in Using Tarot Cards, or read more archived threads.